You may not be a thief, but you willingly and knowingly receive stolen property. What would you call it?

You don't have to agree that "taxation" is theft. Reality doesn't depend on your agreement. "Taxation" means property (money) is taken from people who would rather not give it up- and they are threatened with violence if they refuse to pay, and will be murdered if they refuse long enough. So, it is theft, even if you would willingly pay, IF you paid "taxes", which you don't. No government employee ever "pays taxes". That some people would rather keep their own property, and aren't allowed to, makes it theft. If it were voluntary, no "law" would be required- people could just send the money to government of their own free will. That a "law" is required shows that it isn't voluntary, which shows the nature of "taxation".

Club dues are voluntary; no matter where you live, you decide to join or not. You aren't automatically enrolled, and forced to pay, just because of where you were born and because you didn't decide to abandon your property, your friends, and your family to move somewhere else where a different gang steals from the residents.

Yes, some of the stolen money even goes toward things I would pay for voluntarily, if given the choice. I am not so arrogant that I believe my desire to have a park or a library somehow entitles me to rob others to pay for it. If someone doesn't want to pay for a library, I don't want them to be forced to do so even if it means I don't get to have a library, or that I would have to pay more. Anything else is completely unethical.

Democracy is just mob rule. It is evil when the opinions of 99.99% of the population is allowed to violate the rights of the rest. You may like it, and I wouldn't prevent you and those who agree to play the game from doing so- but leave those who would rather not play out of it. And don't demand that they leave the area.

Somalia is not an example of "no government"- as statists keep wishing it were. It is an example of externally imposed governments (a long line of them) having destroyed the society (yes, government and society are opposites). You might want to read The Law of the Somalis to get that straight.

No one I know of is claiming that without government (more accurately, The State) everyone would just get along. Anarchy is no guarantee that some won't violate and molest others; government is a guarantee that they will. Would you seriously allow someone to "prey upon the weak" if there were no "laws" forbidding it and telling you it's someone else's job to protect them? Statism is amoral and unethical if that's the case.

I haven't really had any bad personal experiences with cops. I don't have to have been murdered to recognize that murder is wrong. I have interacted with several cops over the years, and some were nice. But, as pointed out above, none can be good- it is an impossibility due to what their "job" entails.

To say "All cops are scum" is not at all like saying anything about "all Americans", but is exactly like saying "All rapists are scum" and for the exact same reason- because it is about behavior, not the person. If you believe there can be "good cops" you would have to argue that rapists can also be good people. Are there "good rapists"? If so, then I don't know what your idea of "good" entails. Same with cops.

I'll let you have the last word, if you care to respond.