Most Statists like to claim against libertarians that men are naturally at war with each other and that a situation without a central overseeing Government inevitably leads to the war of all against all in which the most brutish wins. What they believe and want us to believe under threat of death is that Government is a supernatural entity outside of Society. But what their claim REALLY amounts to is that in fear that a war might happen and that the most brutish might win, we should actually grant a diploma and a license to some entity that is precisely characterized by being the most brutish. Once again, it's all about enforcing the certainty of the worst as a claimed cure to the fear of an uncertain bad. Somehow, supporting the worst case scenario that would happen in the darkest depiction of what Anarchy could lead to -- namely the State -- transforms said brutishness and oppression into the supernatural "will of the people", transforming the oppressors into friends. Call William the Bastard "King" or Saddam "President" and he is not a tyrant but a protector. Magic! Yeah, and the respective US and French bureaucracies are justified because the citizens preferred Bush to Kerry, and Chirac to Le Pen? Yeah, right.
The fact that most people in each country do not try to kill each other, that most countries are not at war with each other despite the absence of world government, that in national as well as international relations, policing and justicing are the exception and not the norm, whereas oppression and killings are the norm and liberty the exception wherever Governments are involved -- completely evade the firmly believing Statists. They live in fear and denial, project their wishful dreams of what they fancy should be onto what is an actual nightmare they refuse to study for what it is, and call their opponents utopians and irrealists. OK -- who can sum that up neatly in a concise aphorism?