In the unlikely event that Arch base (core) were to go away, or you were to no longer have access to it, is there a way to continue using pacman and/or git to update installed packages?
If yes, would this be feasible or overly demanding for the user?
If not, welp, the answer is obvious - use VOID, LMDE, openSUSE Tumbleweed, or FreeBSD. 
No, of course not. If the Arch went away than the repos would be gone.
You would basically have maintain the repos yourself.
So what youâre saying is it can work, but it would be overly demanding, so just use another distro instead, right?
I am saying you would basically need to maintain Arch yourself so use another distro.
That being said, I donât think this likely scenario, at least in the near future.
The question is a bit vague. If the Archlinux developers stop working and take the repositories of software and libraries offline, then off course you cannot update your Archlinux based system anymore. But someone else could upload the entire libraries to a different server and these would have to be added as repositories to the pacman config.
pacman itself can be used by other distributions, if they want to use the same package format. And they do not have to access the Archlinux repositories, but their own servers in example.
That means, pacman and other package managers or repositories are not tied to Archlinux at all. So you could just use a different distro, in example Fedora or OpenSuse. These are independent Linux distros and do not rely on Archlinux, pacman or their repositories. No need for BSD. 
Linux, the kernel, with a probability next to 100% will survive the demise of Archlinux, the GNU/Linux distribution.
Thanks for all your answers. Mostly wanted to know how hard Iâd have to work if such an unlikely situation were to occur.
I am guessing though that someone else (or another group) would form a new independent distro similar to Arch in no time flat.
It wouldnât be plausible for one person to do it. You would have to maintain every single package in the repos yourself. Every time there is a new version for any software, you would have to repackage it. And you would have to test it all to make sure itâs not broken. You wouldnât have the time to do it all, let alone actually use your computer.
Simply put, if Arch dies, we wonât be using Arch (or EndeavourOS). This is very unlikely to happen any time soon, but if it does, there are other distros.
Valveâs SteamOS, the one used in the Steam Deck, is based on Archlinux. I donât even expect a giant corporation such as Valve would be able to develop and maintain base Arch themselves. There is a lot of knowledge, time, money and trust involved. Maybe a big company could finance it and build a new base off the legacy Arch.
If Arch dies it would be the end of the world as we know it. 
Debian SID with Openbox would cure that. 
Other mainline distros already exist⌠see: Debian, OpenSuse, Fedora (Red Hat), Slackware, Void, etc.
in my case Debian (sid) with dwm, i3wm, bspwm, hlwm, spectrwmâŚ
Oh yes, I just remembered that Void exists. I would switch to that without a doubt.
The window manager aficionado 
Tiling windows, onlyâŚ
Erik from ArcoLinux loves to say, âIts all Arch.â, but it is certainly not âall Linuxâ for me. Package managers have a huge say in whether I use a distro or not.
I recently switched to KDE, after 2 years of Qtile. And currently I am using an auto tiling addon (Bismuth) and itâs not bad. The entire setup feels and looks almost as if I was using a tiling window manager, but most stuff works out of the box and does not need manual setup in the configs. It tiles automatically, I can use key shortcuts to do almost same basic window management and I even have multiple layouts to switch on the fly.
If you get the chance to work with KDE at some point in your life, remember the addon Bismuth - it could save your life. But man do I miss my Qtile config with regular Python code as configuration. May I ask why you have so many tiling managers installed? I would think 1 or maybe 2 are enough.
The simple answer is that I have those I do because they interest me and âbecause I canâ. Hereâs my currentl list, all running from a single user space:
FWIW⌠these all work & look pretty much the same. None oare a distro setup. On Debian all common features/ functions are handled by .xsessionrc; on arch (like EOS) they exist in .profile.
And it you prefer Gtk, Cinnamon also has all of these features with an extension called gTile (I think). I use the exact same shortcuts on i3WM, Cinnamon, and Qtile. And unless Iâm thinking about it, most times I donât know which one I am using.
There are some specific things that lets me know, though - like Cinnamonâs notifications - as I use Dunst on i3WM and Qtile.
I looked at the WMs you use and dk got me to try it. However, I canât seem to understand how to switch workspaces. More specifically, this line (in the middle) baffles me:
view, send, or follow to a workspace (by number)
alt + {_,shift + ,ctrl + }{1-9,0}
dkcmd ws {view,send,follow} {1-9,10}
Which button is â_â in the above args? Underscore? I tried it â didnât work.
Iâve also tried:
I bet your answer is going to make me feel silly, but Iâm okay with that.
Of course, Linux is a Kernel that lives forever because of:
It will live even longer than us when we die in the year 2100.