Often times, we land on a web page before knowing the history of the website or its funding model, privacy policy, terms of service, etc. This means that, upon visiting a new website for the very first time, consent to view advertising is not an informed decision, it's forced on us.

But aside from that, I've consented for the content provided by the content providers to execute in my browser. I did not extend the same consent to the ad agencies. If content providers wish to host the ad code, images, etc. on their own servers, then your argument starts to make sense. I would still argue that it's up to the content providers to publish whatever they see fit and it's my right as a consumer to control how the information they publish is assembled and presented to me on my machine. Not theirs.

If content providers were to host advertising materials on their own server, it would also make it harder to use ad networks for watering hole attacks and thus the internet would be more secure.

I use Privacy Badger, NoScript, and RequestPolicy to manage my browser's security, and EMET to help keep the rest of my system safe from the browser. I don't rely on AdBlock or any similar tools to achieve this.