The central or core belief of anarchism is that government is immoral and unnatural because they (the anarchist) did not give consent to its existence and to the limits it places upon them.
The assumption is that consent is required for something to be natural or moral. However, they did not consent to being born and nothing is more natural than new life and birth. And I don’t believe they would consider their own existence to be immoral. So, their assumption is false.
After my many years in the libertarian movement and after reading the classic works of anarchists and libertarians, I have applied the logic taught to me when I was busy earning a college degree in philosophy & political science — and found that anarchists are like people born into a house who demand that everyone living there change to accommodate their desires.
They apparently have no idea of the work that went into building the house, of the special advantages they received from being in the house and in the rooms of it they are in, of the labor and other costs involved in maintaining the house, or of how “nasty, brutish and short” their existence would be if the house did not exist.
And the same can be said of libertarians and others who refuse to accept the necessity of government.
The house in this metaphor is society or civilization and there has never been one that has endured without a government of some sort.
Governments may be smaller or larger, more or less bureaucratic, deeply corrupt and closed or basically honest and transparent — but they always exist. The central issue of the current day is not whether government will exist, but whether it will serve We the People — or just the top 1% of the monied elite.