A lot of people demonize any kind of help from the state and collectivism itself as something that shouldn't be tolerated. I agree that in a more ideal system, separation of powers would be more suited to protect the integrity of the institutions. But this is something that requires a group to take their responsibilities very seriously. Decentralization and liberalism can lead to the creation of monopolies, so absolute decentralization isn't the answer either, the state has to regulate the products being made in the nation. This requires the private sector and the government to work together, but a lot of people don't like this and prefer something like a radical division.
I think that despite that an anarchist system can possibly work, at least one with certain authorities but with no political power themselves, like let's say teachers and such, people have something like a natural tendency towards degeneracy when they aren't moderated by authorities. There's a reason why Libertarianism was used by the ruling groups to destroy the old religious systems and groups.
I tend to lean more towards collectivism and authoritarianism for these reasons. To me a system that tries to influence people for the better is simply superior to the anarchist system and It's something people really shouldn't be afraid of since I think It's part of our nature. I even see it as an ethical system and the right thing just as much as education. But no authoritarian system should completely get rid of people's subjectivity and free will either. They should have a decent amount of space to be creative about who they want to be as a person.
there doesn't seem to be anything here