>When I look back at history, I see that the worst people that have done the worst things are in fact people in state governments, using the powers of governmen

>When I look back at history, I see that the worst people that have done the worst things are in fact people in state governments, using the powers of government against civilians. That's because you're looking at the largest damage influenced by a small group of people, instead of total amount over a period of time. Obviously the most damage done by any single person was done by a person with a lot of power, and thus probably a member of the government. That doesn't mean more damage is done when a government is present rather than in total anarchy. Consider a choice between: 1. A mad governor that kills 100 people yearly, but prevents any other killings (somehow) 2. An anarchy system where 100 mad people kill 10 people each every year Your heuristic of 'the worst people that have done the worst things are in fact people in state governments' still holds, because any other murderer only killed 10 people. However, comparing the two options clearly shows the first one is better. TL;DR - availability bias