Your belief in its legitimacy does not make it legitimate, and your belief in its efficacy does not make it immune to basic economics. "Government did X, so therefore we need government to do X," or, "Therefore government does X best" is not a sound argument for government. "But without government, who would build the roads?" is one of the least plausible arguments you could make if you know anything about the history of highways in the USA. The failings of the US health care system are not flaws in the free market, and if "universal health care systems" are so great, why is participation compulsory? Safety is not the result of government violence, and in fact much of the violent crime we have today is a consequence of government violence such as drug prohibition.
Why do you still assert that it is OK to use coercion to compel compliance when you cannot achieve consent? How can you justify government violating others just because you approve of the results?
Sorry but our frame of reference are so far removed that I don't think we can have a productive conversation.
It's not meant as an offence to you , it's just that our realities and lived experiences do not allow us to exchange ideas at a wavelength where it is has a possibility of being anything meaningful.
Reality is the same for both of us. I only hope my questions and analysis eventually encourage you to re-examine your perception of it.
Apparently it is not :)
I appreciate your passion about the subject.