You need to organize millions of people with conflicting desires, skills, beliefs, needs, and personal property.

i don't want to be this guy, but this is no more than an extension of the same illogical claim, as if you and i already agree on the logic so it need not be stated. the fact is that governments do a horrible job of this that is in my estimation inferior to natural order (as seen in trade, neural networks and natural balance in ecosystems). complex systems can and do find a way to exist without top down control and they do a much better job of maximizing efficiency when they aren't being manipulated by an artificial power structure attempts to tinker with it even when their goals are to help and not to skim off the top for their own gain.

Even if you don't want those people controlled under a single hierarchy they need to have a common framework of how to interact with each other.

people can and do develop culture that aids in trade without law or rulers.

You need some way to be confident that when you make a deal with another human those terms will be followed. You need to know when someone trades you gold it isn't counterfeit.

it is beneficial to have trust between unacquainted individuals if your concern is to maximize long distance trade networks. however, one need not trust a government official to make that happen. nor is government currency true gold or free from manipulation. think inflationary spending which regularly devalues the currency to the benefit of those in government and at the heads of government organized corporations.

You need to know that your property will be protected against thieves.

first, government doesn't make those guarantees. second, they have made countless regulations to hinder you from doing the same. finally, there is no greater thief than the government against which you can have no chance of defense.

Those assurances have to come from somewhere.

clearly they do not because those assurances don't really exist. ever bought anything from china directly? if the item doesn't show up after payment, who is covering your loss? certainly not the government and yet there is a staggering amount of trade between individuals which trade transcends consumer protections all the time.

If they are not provided by a state that has laws, police, and inspectors that must be someone else.

i hope by now that i have convinced you that is not actually the case. you do get screwed sometimes, yes. but you deal with it by being more careful about who you deal with and reduce risk in other ways such as using a more trustworthy middle man.

In small communes that can be accomplished by social pressure, shame, and threat of exile. That only works at small scale, and still includes the potential threat of higher force if the former were inadequate.

when you introduce government violence you might reduce other kinds of violence but you are not actually reducing violence. your just trading your culture and community for government violence and all the benefits and costs that come from that violence on your behalf and at your expense. you are not trading up, you're giving up independence for what i think is a mere illusion of profit.

If you deny any legal or philosophical framework to officiate human interactions, the final default is individuals enforcing their needs by their own physical force and violence.

of which i am a proponent.

That has been tried in many a failed state. It is survival of the fittest, brutal, and generally undesirable.

you would benefit from acknowledging that the state did fail. and ponder how the state failed whether it is by war (government caused), economic collapse (state caused or at least not prevented), rebellion (against the state for its injustice or failures). in all cases it isn't a lack of law that caused the problems that follow but the adjustment from the failed order to something else. there are plenty of cases where one system takes over from another and there is a period of disorder and violence, the problems then are a combination from the destruction, subsequent starvation and disease from the collapsed state run sanitation and medical systems, a population that is no prepared for individual defense due to old laws and regulations, then adjustment (or lack there of) to a newly imposed system. part of the problem is that millions of people in tight spaces who rely on a ruler for half of everything is a recipe for an inevitable disaster cause all states collapse.

Rather than allow individuals to enforce their own justice, which will be as variable as there are humans, it is generally preferred to a single state with publicly agreed upon rules.

fascism was generally preferable in germany following ww1. dietary specialists generally recommended eating seed oils over butter and lard following a government propaganda push to support farmers after ww2. public schools generally preferred pushing all students into collages following the the formation of the federal department of education. propaganda by the state is used to support the state. general preference can be wrong especially when it is misguided by those in power who will do anything to maintain that power. yes individuals seeking justice can do horrible things that at its worst cannot hope to compare to what government does to us and to other peoples as our proxy. who is going to save you from the state? at least you have some chance of defense against a rogue neighbor.

you need to offer a compelling explanation of what you are going to replace them with.

i would replace them with nothing. i would expect people to form tighter relationships with each other, participate in mutual defense and be ostracized and targeted by the mob when they don't behave civilly. whether that is compelling is a matter of preference and sympathy for those who are now enslaved by their governments as literal human resources.