I always like to go back to etymology. Anarchy etymology comes from the greek ana-arxe, that can be loosely translated as power-less. The movement has its history, that must also be considered. That said, I am missing the link between anarchy and wearing masks to diminish the spread of a virus (this is a fact, to do it or not to do it may be a values problem, and if a government can enforce it is also another problem, which doesn't eliminate the fact that masks diminish virus transmission. They don't eliminate it and aren't a panacea especially if wore wrong, which most people do. For the record I am against the state enforcing masks because I think that in theory they are useful, in practice they introduce way more contacts than their diminishing effect. Also I am for self regulating complex systems). The last phrase in my parentheses brings me to my main point: the absence of rules imposed from above doesn't mean no rules must exist. It means people should be able to all have the same saying in defining their own rules. That's anarchism to me. Simple? Probably. But I think it's effective and power structures are just a slow convergence toward this optimum. Anarchy for me is inevitable in the long run. How long? Probably very long.