Sadly the state needs a bit of money to run things. But the current way that democracies run is completely flawed. I have a rough solution to that problem: https://steemit.com/government/@bitbrain/the-details-of-a-blockchain-based-electronic-direct-democracy
I have to disagree on the point of war though. While the US certainly sticks its nose where it doesn't belong, it does keep a lot of very bad people in check. If people like Hussein and Bin Laden were aloud to run amok, it would completely destabilise the entire region. That would affect everyone on Earth and send oil prices through the ceiling - highly inflationary to us all. A certain military presence is always a necessity. As peaceful as a nation may become, that will in no way save it from another aggressive nation. An undefended nation is one living on borrowed time.
The state is based on violating non-violent individuals and thus is illegitimate.
“The slavemasters have to get the cotton picked.”
I wouldn't say that it is based on that. That's really not how states came into being if you look at history. BUT: they certainly don't care in the least about violating all kinds of rights of adults without their consent!
Without violence the state could not exist. This is not an opinion. Just think about it. If you take away war, forced currency control, and forced participation in state affairs, states as they exist today, simply could not be. They would not be able to reach the magnitude they have.
Historically, violence is exactly how countries came to be. One man or group of men claimed they magically owned vast swathes of land, declared themselves leaders or rulers, and use meviolence against anyone in their way, peaceful or not, to take control of a secure dominance of their particular region.