Well I think government is the result, not the cause. We could go round and round with chicken or egg arguments all day. In the end its government bad; class disparity bad.
Discussion
Govt is the only thing that remains when society collapses. If businesses were the real parasites & the real slave drivers, then only businesses would be left when everything else is destroyed. But businesses only exist in great abundance when an economy is healthy & free & in places where people want to live because they aren't being coerced & stolen from.
The political class works to ensare businesses into collecting taxes from employees for them, or reporting on independent contractors for them, or collecting info on customers for them, or into imposing some new ESG or DEI policy. If they don't play ball they get "regulated" out of business, if they do then the govt rewards them by regulating their competitors out of existence. So those who play the Washington game are rewarded for some time, until someone comes up with a greedy & destructive policy that will eat them too.
There really isn't much ambiguity to the matter at all.
Where does the political class come from? It doesn't appear as if by magic. It grows from the economically powerful surplus extracting ruling class. The Bolshevik revolution just assumed the levers of power that were left by the previous feudal monarchy.
It's as simple as the ruling class vs the working class. The ruling class can be in several forms including monarchs and feudal lords, corporate global capitalists and communist bureaucrats. Anarchism solves this.
The political class grows out of gangs of people who figure out they can steal a lot more if they steal a little on a regular basis & act like it's for your own good. Unions, mafias, terrorist groups, etc. Unproductive groups/organizations that exist by threatening people who are productive.
"Pay me to protect you"
From what?
"From what I will do to you if you don't pay me to protect you"
Anarchism as an idea doesn't really solve anything IMO, anarchism will be the result of technological developments (like bitcoin, nostr, keet, darknet markets, & 3d printing or home manufacturing) that make economic freedom, freedom of speech, & the freedom to protect yourself impossible to violate in any enforceable manner. When it's easier to protect property rights than to violate them & violators are more likely to be shot than cheered, then we will be free. But I think things are likely to get uglier first. Too much of the "eat the rich" bullshit has taken hold of people.
The technological moves toward freedom will do nothing more than undo the technological moves away from freedom. We would still be on the gold standard if the telegraph was never invented. Without telecommunications then the hierarchical head of a community would need to live locally instead of on an island somewhere.
Telecommunications have made EVERYONE better off. Previously people couldn't even coordinate with neighboring towns to figure out what they needed until they traveled there. A gold standard wasn't even needed except for trading with people you didn't know. The idea that undoing major tech advancements would make life better is COMPLETELY retarded. Technology generally empowers individuals & sets them free from their fellow man. While there are secondary effects that scale negative influences, direct and brutal slavery & most of the previously inescapable evils of individual tyrants are undone by technological progress. The major problem now is not that people don't have the capacity to say no to tyrants, it's just how many cowards & self loathing morons will work to destroy everything because they are too stupid to understand & appreciate what they have. You can set people free of others, but you can't set people free of themselves.
If you think telecommunications didn't accelerate centralization and authoritarianism faster relative to overall human enrichment then you're out of your mind.
Also, you can't apply negative (or positive) traits to whole class of people by calling them all lazy and compliant to tyrants. You should make these judgements on individuals relative to humanity. A large enough group of people mostly has the same attributes as all of humanity. You're throwing shade on billions of people which is kind of anti-human.
History has been nothing but tribal wars, slavery, & grinding poverty for the overwhelming majority of history. Telecommunications & industrialization brought about the end of slavery & produced the greastest prosperity ever known. You can't whip a slave into doing skilled labor. The more skill & understanding is needed to produce things the more people have to learn to trade with one another if they want to be propersous.
Even fiat money, with all of its flaws, became dominant because the benefit of facilitating global trade was far more valuable to everyone involved than the costs.
I saw the below article in Odell's feed. It's very relevant and interesting. It doesn't take a hard position for or against what either of us are saying. It's long.
https://www.anarchonomicon.com/p/after-the-state-the-coming-of-neo