Thank you for responding in detail and for sharing with me your live experience. Before I get into the points you made, are you familiar with democide and the 260 million deaths caused by government? If you're advocating for government, please also understand you're advocating for the harm it causes.
As for the middle east and Israel in particular, I have no lived experience there beyond the narrative of waring tribes, religious holy war, and territorial disputes that go back generations. Just as the Treaty of Versailles essentially ensured WWII would happen because the agreements after WWI were impractical, isn't it possible some of the treaties which have also negatively impacted the Palestinian people to the point where some have taken to violence? Is none of that blame to be laid at the feet of the Israeli government at all?
If one group of people literally wants to whip another group of people off the face of the planet as a genocide, then yes, I see how violence appears mostly unavoidable. That said, I do know of successes (even in the middle east) with tools like NVC: Violence Is a Tragic Expression of an Unmet Need.
It's clear that the Hobbesian Leviathan as the best approach to dealing with violence is the story that best fits reality for you. I'm sure nothing I say would convince you beyond your lived experience (why would it?) but I'd also ask that you at least consider the harm governments cause and especially the US government with the way it uses global financial banking to fund all sides of every war via the military industrial complex. Who builds those missiles and how are they funded? Once army, government, and war are consider viable solutions, all sides get turned into business opportunities at the cost of human life.
I'd prefer individuals be free to equip themselves as needed for protection. Personal defense drones and the like, things that today there is no market to create because governments have a monopoly on defense.
I don't disagree with you about the harm government causes and would prefer to live without it in complete freedom and liberty. I am libertarian and anti-authoritarian but a realist.
I just don't think the complete elimination of government is achievable, even from a theoretical perspective, while we remain vulnerable creatures of the flesh.
I am not advocating for government, just recognising that some government is inevitable and essential.
I think the best way to minimise the harm government causes while maximising its benefits is to recognise its core purposes and limit expansion beyond those core purposes as much as possible.