Monarchists don’t exist. It is impossible to argue against your own right to self-ownership because every argument you make is a piece of evidence for the existence of self-ownership.
Nope. If you believe in the divine right of kings God owns you and the king is God’s representative here on earth. Additionally, you can also believe in self ownership and voluntarily cede self sovereignty to a monarch.
That’s really a theological argument and is beyond the scope of the discussion.
Insanity is entirely relative. If someone believes himself to be a monarch and his subjects believe it too then for all intents and purposes the realm is not an asylum.
Actually an anarchist is proffering a political system he claims is achievable. The anarchist does not accept reality - the anarchist is insane. The anarch recognises reality, does not propose some utopian political system. The anarch is sane.
You can believe whatever you like, but if their is no evidence, you are wrong. If you ignore evidence, you are insane.
It’s not a theological statement, it’s a mathematical one.
Literally, every differential part of every verbalization an individual makes is made under their own power.
The integral whole of those differential parts WILL always be greater than any evidence generated by it.
That is a mathematical fact.
Believing something contradicted by scientific(observational and empirical) evidence without putting forth a larger body of empirical evidence is insanity.
Anarchy literally means ‘against rulers’ so it cannot “proffer a political system”, because political literally means “of the citizens” and you must have a government rule over some domain to have citizens.
“some utopian political system” is a strawman just the same.