No. It is a structured organisation with powers and responsibilities beyond that of any individual.

I disagree that they have anything beyond that of an Individual Human Being. If you follow that logic then they would have special rights that no one else has; such as the "right to steal" and call it "taxation". They are not above the rest of us, but that is exactly what that leads to. That is absurd and I do not think for a minute that I could have such a valid claim to do the same as a private Individual Human Being, nor could I turn around and give such a right to a third party to act on my behalf.

I think its important to read both definition together. The second one is crucial: " a service rendered in the public interest "

Well, I chose the first because I thought it was the most concise (I pointed that out) and cited my source so the others could be found as well.

Consider child and family social services (I believe you call them child protective services in the USA). One of the powers they need is the power to take children from their parents if they suspect abuse. They usually only have this power through the courts but they can exercise it for 28 hours periods in the case of an emergency.

I consider them criminal because they will come in without due process of law and kidnap the child(ren) from the parent(s) and or guardian. By the U.S. justice system, they must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that such abuse took place; they instead come in, treat the parent(s) as if they have already been found guilty and take the child(ren). If no evidence has been found, this still may not clear their names. It is one of the most abused uses of so-called "authority" and "government" services out there. Such people can and do define abuse to be anything they decide. Also, a person might be any family member and 'charged with abuse', but the case was unfounded; it stays on that person's record.

Would you trust a private company to do this? A company that is doing it for profit? (Not exactly sure how profit would work in this situation).

Yes, or at least I would be more inclined to trust a private company (non-profit or not) to go about helping to minimize abuse of children. Profit would likely work through competition and reputation; the incentive to the business owner(s) is to stay in business, so, they better provide the best service they can.

Even if you would trust a private company to fulfil this function then in effect they are a government - they have powers beyond that of an individual.

How does that even follow? They have no 'authority' to do anything that an Individual could not do. I could not go to someone's door, based upon the perception that the person living there is abusing their child. I could make the charge, but that person has a right to face their accuser; and I would have to prove that they are guilty. But I could not legitimately break into their house and kidnap their child. And no one else has that right either. This applies to most if not all of what ‘government’ people claim to have a right to do.

If a gang of thugs attempted to claim that they have powers beyond that of the Individual, it would not make it so and they would not be able to claim such simply because they are part some gang.

Therefore, a 'criminal' government - as that video calls it - is essential. Whether the government is public or private (the latter being very strange).

The fact that they are criminal renders any sort of ‘authority’ or ‘right to rule’ nonexistent, therefore, this means that legitimate “government” is nonexistent; save for the Individual human being ‘self-governing’ themselves. So, no it is not essential.

Every person on this planet uses their own judgment, even if they claim they do not judge. It is impossible not to.

I'm glad that most peoples judgement does not favor anarchy.