I beg to differ that governed society is less violent than a existence of anarchy.
From the first governments of 3500 B.C. to the present ones nothing else has claimed so much blood, slaughter, war, and conflict like the interests of government has.
Therefore government is no different or better than a existence of anarchy as it claims to be.
You must sacrifice yourself for the the good of the Empire.
Human sacrifices are needed to appease the Emperor-gods. 
Exactly. Every government needs it’s slaves and sacrifices as human fodder.
Don’t mind the killing, enslaving, and imprisoning. It’s just good business.
Indirectly yes As governments increase productivity and distribution of resources the population boomed then when neighoring tribes /turned city states conflict with other tribes/city state more men are availiable to fight.
The differance is context where in so many lives are what % of the population as opposed to more archaic societies where a tribal war would kill 80-90% of the tribe whereas the most destuctive wars don’t even reach 10%.
Comparing two differant things really and the thread is obviously biased, how it should read is based on current population levels would society be more violent/Deadly without government, my answer is absolutely.
To Stoic:
Do you know how many people that have died by government led wars worldwide from the 1800’s to the present year of 2012? Saying a lot is over simplifying it.
Also, look at the deaths of communist Russia or China.
Look at the deaths of both combined world wars.
Government is not an Autonomous creature, it’s made up of the people within the State for whatever reason, There is never one reason why a War starts theres always variables.
Anyways do I know the exact number no, my guess Is many millions of people, but the world population started to rise at that point too, so how many of those who died in War would have made it too adulthood had the lack of food, medicine and infant mortality stayed the same?
The point of this mental expirience here is that government cannot claim it’s existence is any less violent or war torn than a existence of anarchy.
I wouldn’t claim that, i’d say it is far less chaotic and that it’s violence “can” be far more purposeful, depending on the government.
Naturally, if you centralise the capacity to kill people then you can kill large numbers of people more efficiently…
True, but that isn’t what I meant.
It really isn’t any less chaotic either.
The only difference is that the government is efficient at hiding human misery and general existential chaos that is until it occasionally slips through the cracks…