Is Anarchy really that bad?

Anarchy is probably the least popular idea on the planet; but, just think about it for a second.

Are there so many laws on the books that most of us commit three felonies a day without knowing it for our safety, or to control us? Did the state issue $500 fines to people attending a drive-in church service for our safety, or because it was an opportunity to steal a few thousand dollars from poor black people? Is civil asset forfeiture there to keep criminals at bay, or is it the government stealing from us? A spokesperson for a police department even called civil asset forfeiture "pennies from heaven." Did we throw Japanese people into concentration camps out of pragmatism? Did the Trail of Tears happen out of some kind of benevolence? And, I'm just talking about the freest country in the world. Were the gulags an exercise of enlightened people silencing the morons if their era? Was Mao's famine government making a proper sacrifice in the name of modernity?

Really, I'm running out of reasons to think that the damn thing should even exist.

Maybe Tolstoy was right:

"Even if the absence of government really did mean anarchy in the negative, disorderly sense - which is far from being the case - even then, no anarchical disorder could be worse than the position to which government has led humanity."

We're not just going to try government again and get it right. We've been trying that for thousands of years. Just let it die.