Fighting is one of my biggest issues, single topic, 'fight' du jour, whatever you want to call it. Maybe that's my line of distinction where to cooperate and where to withdraw: is the goal attainable only by fighting, by destruction, by violence even if it's against one single individual? (individual being my other 'big topic' but let's skip that as it does not add to this discussion)
You make some very good points, that of course there is some progress, even in the right direction (to avoid progressivism ;), and yet still the bottom line is: monkeys throwing stones. If mankind as a species, with all it's progress over several high civilisations blossoming and dying again (most/all of them violently) over the millenia, has still not managed to outgrow it's propensity to live and let live by force, then all the taxes in the world, all the regulations, all the religions, all the humanitarians, all the 'good fights', are subject to that force or at least gravitating towards it. I as an individual am no exception - I too have these violent urges to defend my freedom, my property, my peace of mind in my hermitage. And yes: with force when push comes to shove, which it will sooner or (than) later and most likely ending in the destruction of my hermitage, my property, my freedom, my life.
Look at the net outcome: not one century (dare I argue one generation?) goes by that there is not some major war, some revolution or other. No millennia that a civilisation is blossoming and being torn apart by violence. Even that 'shining beacon of freedom and peace' as America is always portrayed, is now subject to (fear of) terrorism, to violent progressivism (now that they can no longer hide their evil intentions behind politicians), to a revolution within it's own borders. A revolution tearing down everything that the other revolution at the beginning sought to give us. Pleasing symmetry I'd say ...
So yes: I admit to "standing in the corner being ... " well not pure but disillusioned. The net outcome is that we're teetering on the brink of another global war (worse of course across the pond but more 'expected', even accepted here, than in the 'shining beacon'), with more unprincipled twitchy fingers (Germany and France being no exception with their Frauke Petry and Marine le Penn happy to ride Trumps coat tails) on the triggers of various guns, with larger egos that rational sense and no moral foundation whatsoever.
That is also why I denounce Donny the Trump card: he may implement some sound regulations, he may favor some of your preferred tax-payers with reductions, but on a net scale what does he really stand for? Being without an alternative we'll of course have to wait and see, or argue and fight and see in some cases, however without a rational basis, without predictable, even outspoken or written down credible goals and intentions, you're at the mercy of his temper, of his own cronyism, of his own bullying ego. And you not only accept that in a president, you think it's 'normal', even justify it because you cannot have a president without at least one pimple ... don't get me wrong: I'm not asking for Gaia where everybody is in total agreement with everybody else singing OM. I am however asking for some basic principles that should be a non-negotiable part of a government that demands to govern me. I have yet to see such a government or presidency or society or country. They prefer to 'fight it out'.
Which by the way is what I personally find most repulsive about Trump, just to round out the argument to the people 'I'd not sit at dinner with'. Who needs another alpha with a big ego as his only recommendation, when humanity is having another orgy of violence? Really think he'll protect you from all the other bellowing alphas and make your home, your property, your freedom, secure and untouchable? Respect your constitutional rights and boundaries after you've supported him on some topic where he was moving in the right direction? I'm not counting on it, which is why I live as far apart from other humans as humanly possible, to put more distance between that force and my own - to postpone 'fighting the good fight' as long as possible.
What good can come from constant destruction - even if it is the destruction of evil?
PS: and yes I understand that your arguing, your 'fighting the good fight', is not necessarily done with force (education, conviction, minarchism, pick your favorite 'weapon') - however if you follow any argument to it's final conclusion I have yet to find one that was implemented without force because the other side of that argument did willingly and peacefully concede defeat - a word itself already implying force