“You seem to be educated enough to realize that there is such thing as an efficient and functional sovereign states (mostly the scandinavian).”
I am not interested in what is functional or works well. I am interested in what is moral and right. Many people thought that a society based on chain slavery was “efficient and functional”. If you have the ability to rob your neighbor and get away with it instead of earning your currency would you do that? I should think not. If it is immoral for you to rob your neighbor by threat of violence to fund what you want, would it be immoral for a large group of your friends to do the very same thing? What about if you elected a representative to do the very same thing on your behalf and call it taxation? Does the morality of the situation change anywhere along the way. I would submit that it has not. Theft is wrong whether done by an individual, group of private individuals, or a group of individuals calling themselves agents of the State.
Morality is not a numbers game. Wrong is wrong no matter if everyone is doing it. Right is right no matter if you are the only one doing it. The laws of morality are as universal and consistent as the laws of mathematics, physics, and thermodynamics. Just because there are people who practice bad mathematics does not invalidate mathematics. In the same way just because there are some people who survive off of theft, assault, rape, and murder does not invalidate morality. If it cannot be universalizable it is an invalid concept.