Noam Chomsky får en fråga och ger ett svar:

So if business both derives from the state and is so good at capturing the state, why isn’t abolishing the state a better strategy for defeating business power than enhancing the state’s power would be?

Well, there’s a very simple answer to that: it’s not a strategy, and since it’s not a strategy at all, there can’t be a better strategy. The strategy of ”eliminating the state” is back on the level of ”let’s have peace and justice”. How do you proceed to eliminate the state? Okay? Can you think of a way of doing it? I mean, if there were a way of doing it in the existing world, everything would collapse and be destroyed. You just can’t do it. I mean, there is nothing to replace it. If there was a rich, powerful network of, you know, cooperatives, community organizations, worker-controlled industry, you know, extending over the whole country, and the whole world, in fact, yeah, then you can talk about eliminating states. But to talk about eliminating the state in the world as it exists is simply to keep yourself in some remote academic seminar or small group, you know, saying, ”Gee, this would be nice.” It’s not a strategy, so there can’t be a better strategy. We are faced with realities.

Även på högerkanten finns anarkistiska drömmar. Är Chomskys svar relevant även för dem? Det finns en hel del analyser av hur staten har uppkommit. Finns motsvarande analys av hur en övergång från samhällen med en stat till samhällen utan en stat skulle kunna gå till?