It depends what's meant by anarchism. One on hand you have individualist anarchism, and on other other hand you have political anarchism.
In practice, living in such a society wouldn't really be all that different to day to day life in any existing nation. You need to remember that these philosophies arose in a period in which much of Europe was ruled by absolute monarchs or dictatorship, so when they said "no ruler" they really meant "no God Emperor who can fuck you up on a whim". So a lot of stuff that groups like anarchists actually proposed are actually rights that we take for granted living in modern liberal democracies. It's not a
response against modern liberal democracies, it's just a variant on that.
Look for example at the
Ancien Regime of France, which was the law code of France pre-revolution, and realise that other nations which had not had an uprising had similar laws around the time the Anarchists were writing their stuff. Up until the ~1790s the mandated punishments for various crimes in France included being boiled alive, being dismembered, the breaking wheel, being burnt to death etc. So when 19th century European anarchists were writing about "no rulers" they were writing in a period in which those brutal types of execution laws either still existed or were within living memory. They weren't calling for
nobody to be in charge of anything in some sort of philosophical sense, but for an end to dictatorship. Political Anarchism is just the name of one of the proposes non-dictatorial systems.