To be fair, government has been necessary for countless of years. To simply desire anarchy goes to show just how little you've analyzed the current world and previous ways of governance.
There is a beautiful idea of Anarchy in the cryptospace, where liberalism meets cryptography. Each man and woman to their own, governed by a blockchain as the ultimate Leviathan.

Anarchy in its entirety as 'absence of government' is dangerous to anyone involved. It's back to ancient tribal behaviour, which granted is still inside of us to some extent. Luckily that behaviour is countered by our desire to work in groups, to follow common laws, to establish rules with one another.
The people you see as 'evil' will still be 'evil' whether they're in government or not. It is because of this simple reason we need a common entity of laws that we all can agree to share.

Humans have a need to establish laws and rules. The same 'evil' people as before recognize this and take it upon themselves to work corruption with words and not with law.
By allowing the law and rulemaking to be high-jacked by just about anyone who dares to try, we'll see corruption. I'd much rather see a democratic voting system, built on a blockchain, with every person represented by their digital identity. Wouldn't that be sort of a cryptographic anarchistic society?
Is it safe? About as safe as true Anarchy, but because it's on the internet, everyone will be fast to correct mistakes.

It hasn't been until these modern times with the upcoming of globalization and the internet that we've started to be able to get together in large international communities, sharing culture, thoughts, ideas and beliefs. By these new modes of communicating with one another we're going to be able to build that Leviathan Hobbes talks about, not just an entity represented by the people, but an entity that which is the people.