“And I've been saying that you can have a governing body AND anarchism”. If you have a governing body then you are no longer an anarchy society. Now I’m starting to think you are the troll here. Want me to read the definition to you again?
It’s: “the state of a society being freely constituted without authorities or a governing body”. Call this government whatever else you want, but it’s no longer an anarchy, by definition.
“what YOU Have been arguing is that you need a STATE to do it, which is a different thing all together. “
What is the state if not a governing body? Is there some other governing body that you are referring to, that at the same time you don’t consider to be a governing body? Again, I’m starting to think you’re trolling here.
“‘(I believed that other forms of government are just as capable of defending their rights)’
And you would be wrong on the basis that they are just as capable of oppressing them”
That does nothing to challenge the assertion that other forms of government are just as capable of defending their rights. In practice, some governments may oppress minority groups, but others may defend their rights.
Keep in mind that the government is not the only thing in the world that is capable of discrimination/causing harm to minority groups. Individuals are capable of this, organizations are capable of this, etc. The government is capable of defending the rights of minority groups from being violated from others, including by the government itself (through the courts). This is a defense mechanism that one cannot use if a governing body didn’t exist (like in an anarchy).