Fptp is fine if either of the main parties is anarchist

People who defend fptp do so because they either know that pr would reduce the size of the state and do not want that to happen... or they falsely consider one of the two emergent fptp parties to be anarchists. People who support fptp are either ignorant anarchists (who think that one of the main parties is anarchist) or they are are not anarchists and genuinely prefer the state to remain. (And know that pr is bad for the state.) They are willing to tolerate one of the two dominant fptp parties which means they tolerate (or even support) the state... provided not one of the fptp parties is anarchist or they falsely think that one is. People who support pr can only do so because they do not like state aggression. (Democracy prevents state aggression.) If neither (or even not both) of the two main fptp parties is aggressive then there is no strong reason to reject fptp. Fptp fails because both of the two main parties is usually statist. People who like fptp are not anarchists... unless the fptp party which they support can be considered to be an anarchist party. If neither of the fptp parties is anarchist then fptp-supporters are either statists or of the (false) view that at least one of the fptp parties is anarchist. If neither fptp party is anarchist then pr is preferable.