Politics

Anatomy of the State

Anatomy of the State

  • Downloads：2522
  • Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date：2021-05-08 10:55:55
  • Update Date：2025-09-06
  • Status：finish
  • Author：Murray N. Rothbard
  • ISBN：151467498X
  • Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
  • Download

Summary

LARGE PRINT EDITION！ More at LargePrintLiberty。com。

This gives a succinct account of Rothbard's view of the state。 Following Franz Oppenheimer and Albert Jay Nock， Rothbard regards the state as a predatory entity。 It does not produce anything but rather steals resources from those engaged in production。 In applying this view to American history， Rothbard makes use of the work of John C。 Calhoun

How can an organization of this type sustain itself？ It must engage in propaganda to induce popular support for its policies。 Court intellectuals play a key role here， and Rothbard cites as an example of ideological mystification the work of the influential legal theorist Charles Black， Jr。， on the way the Supreme Court has become a revered institution。

Download

Reviews

Omar Diego ，

Succinct。 Perhaps too brief， but nonetheless truthful。 I encourage further reading of the topics here abridged。

Jesse Hughes ，

Checked out the audiobook from the local library because taxes。

Ali Alnafisah ，

كتاب رائع جدًا يحاول فيه روثبارد في فصله الأول شرح المغالطات في تعريف الدولة وماهية الدولة، بالإضافة إلى بهارات نقدية للأنظمة الديمقراطية، وفي الفصل الثاني يضع روثبارد تعريفه للدولة باخصار أنها معاكسة لل natural law ويضيف بأنها تعادي الحرية الفردية للأفراد。وفي الفصل الثالث الذي يلي تعريف ماهية الدولة، يطرح روثبارد كيفية حفاظ الدولة على سلطتها وعلى تقبل المجتمع لذلك عن طريق السلاح المدمر ألا وهو الأيديولوجيا، سواء كانت قومية أو عرقية أو دينية، أو علمية！والفصل الرابع هو عبارة عن مشكلات تعدي السلطا كتاب رائع جدًا يحاول فيه روثبارد في فصله الأول شرح المغالطات في تعريف الدولة وماهية الدولة، بالإضافة إلى بهارات نقدية للأنظمة الديمقراطية، وفي الفصل الثاني يضع روثبارد تعريفه للدولة باخصار أنها معاكسة لل natural law ويضيف بأنها تعادي الحرية الفردية للأفراد。وفي الفصل الثالث الذي يلي تعريف ماهية الدولة، يطرح روثبارد كيفية حفاظ الدولة على سلطتها وعلى تقبل المجتمع لذلك عن طريق السلاح المدمر ألا وهو الأيديولوجيا، سواء كانت قومية أو عرقية أو دينية، أو علمية！والفصل الرابع هو عبارة عن مشكلات تعدي السلطات لحدودها الدستورية وبذلك تصل إلى الجريمة الأكبر وهي التعدي على حرية الفرد، ومعضلة تحديد فعل السلطة هل هو دستوري أو غير دستوري。والفصل الخامس يضع روثبارد مخاوف السلطة وكيفية تدمير أي دولة يكون عن طريقين أساسيين، ألا وهما الحروب أو الانقلابات الثورية。وفي الفصل السادس يرينا روثبارد كيف تتفاعل الدول المختلفة مع بعضها البعض وبناء العلاقات الإقليمية والتجارية حتى أثناء الحروب، وكيف انحرف ذلك إلى الوضع الأسوأ في القرن العشرين عن ما كان عليه في القرنين السابع عشر والثامن عشر。والفصل السابع والأخير يضع روثبارد النقاط على الحروف، وبتشاؤم يحاول أن يبحث معنا عن حل مشكلة الحكومات وتعديها على الحرية الفردية، وأن الحلول بعيدة تمامًا وما علينا الآن إلا أن نطرح تساؤلات أخرى من أجل البحث عن حل "إن" كان هنالك حل لهذه المشكلة。كتاب مثري جدًا رغم صغره وإمكانية إتمام قراءته في جلسة واحدة، أتمنى أن أرى نسخة مترجمة في يوم من الأيام。 。。。more

Sarah ，

Eye opening information。 A good， short， straight forward book。

Carl ，

A good introduction to Anarcho-Capitalism。

Canaan ，

I enjoyed this as a kind of enchiridion of libertarian sentiments， or， as Milton Friedman said of his Capitalism and Freedom， "subject matter for bull sessions。" Very insightful for getting what the libertarian deal is。 And despite my opposition to libertarian ideology， I enjoyed some of Rothbard's polemics， e。g。 against dogmatic tradition， religious authority， and nationalism。 Other statements， such as "The government does not in any accurate sense 'represent' the majority of the people" （p。 10 I enjoyed this as a kind of enchiridion of libertarian sentiments， or， as Milton Friedman said of his Capitalism and Freedom， "subject matter for bull sessions。" Very insightful for getting what the libertarian deal is。 And despite my opposition to libertarian ideology， I enjoyed some of Rothbard's polemics， e。g。 against dogmatic tradition， religious authority， and nationalism。 Other statements， such as "The government does not in any accurate sense 'represent' the majority of the people" （p。 10）， combined with Rothbard's discussion of John Calhoun's theory of concurrent majorities and nullification， left a lot to unpack， and I found this exercise profitable。 For example， it was interesting to think about Rothbard's statement in relation to current GOP obstructionism and voting restrictions， and the long history of anti-majoritarian tactics， notably the filibuster， as a weapon against civil rights。 Not surprisingly， Rothbard was vehemently opposed to civil rights and celebrated the confederacy。 Rothbard's remarks on the symbiosis between the state and intellectuals in disseminating ideologies favorable to the ruling classes in order to preserve coercive and unjust state power also sheds some light， I think， on the attitudes of often histrionic anti-woke pundits -- similarly， on the fairly widespread opposition to experts and scientists during the COVID-19 pandemic。 Intriguingly， it seems like some rightwingers share views about the relationship of knowledge and power popularly attributed to the reviled （and I quote） "Messiah of Wokedom，" Foucault。 Perhaps this is like the Peter Pinguid Society in The Crying of Lot 49， which is so rightwing it's leftwing。 Finally， the cover art struck me as inordinately funny -- someone took "anatomy" in the title and was like: an anatomical sketch it is。 。。。more

Jeremy Randall ，

Short and sweet。 But packed。 I love solutions。 I love hope。 And I love this book even tho it has neither of those。 This guy quickly got my attention by clearly setting out the basics。 what is a state， why is a state， how does a state interact with other states at little tea parties and such。 I want to read it again。 and probably track a bunch of the footnotes。 but。。。 liked it。

Chris Concannon ，

Such a tight read jam packed with powerful statements on what the State is， what it fears most， and its relation to its subjects。 On second read through。 Will most likely commit to reading once per year。 5 out of 5 stars for most anything Rothbard

Elliott ，

Immediately Murray Rothbard begins his Anatomy of the State with a strawman: "Some theorists venerate the State as the apotheosis of society; others regard it as an amiable though often inefficient， organization for achieving social ends; but almost all regard it as a necessary means for achieving the goals of mankind， a means to be ranged against the 'private sector' and often winning in this competition of resources。" I'm certain there are patriotic theorists， and theorists who consider the st Immediately Murray Rothbard begins his Anatomy of the State with a strawman: "Some theorists venerate the State as the apotheosis of society; others regard it as an amiable though often inefficient， organization for achieving social ends; but almost all regard it as a necessary means for achieving the goals of mankind， a means to be ranged against the 'private sector' and often winning in this competition of resources。" I'm certain there are patriotic theorists， and theorists who consider the state an 'amiable though inefficient organization。' We're not reading those theorists though， we're reading Rothbard。 I produce this to illustrate an important part of this text which is that if you started to cross out logical fallacies in "Anatomy" you wouldn't have much of a text at all。 Rothbard's favourite fallacy seems to be the reductio ad Hitlerum。 This is a favourite of the libertarian right in general and though Rothbard was hardly the first to utilize the comparison he exemplifies its usage: "Jews murdered by the Nazi government were not murdered; instead， they must have 'committed suicide，' since they were the government （which was democratically chosen）， and therefore， anything the government did to them was voluntary on their part。" Of course the deported French， Polish， and Soviet Jews didn't have a say in Germany's electoral prospects but Rothbard skips past that because it doesn't fit his hyperbolic statement。 He continues in this hyperbole only with a touch of the melodramatic: "Briefly， the State is that organization in society which attempts to maintain a monopoly of the use of force and violence in a given territorial area; in particular it is the only organization in society that obtains its revenue not by voluntary contribution or payment for services rendered but by coercion。" There is a kernel of truth here: the State does maintain a monopoly of the use of force and violence in a given territorial area。 But， what is interesting is that Rothbard never asks the obvious 'why？' The state utilizes force and violence to protect private property。 It prevents one person's usurpation of the property rights of another because of this monopoly of force。 Indeed if you read into Rothbard's silly "Ruritania" analogy you can see this quite clearly: the "bandits" took other people's property and formed "The State" to protect their property。 Property rights require a strong state as the poor victims of the "Ruritania" analogy make clear。 Going off of that the State most certainly does not make its money solely of coercion。 In fact the State does provide many services: which is protecting property rights， ensuring markets at home， negotiations for them abroad， a stable currency， and taxation is the fee for that service。 Rothbard simply doesn't like paying for that service （though he enjoys receiving it）。 Of all of the flimsy examples in this book though here is my favourite in regards to how property rights come about: "[Man] does this， first， by finding natural resources， and then by transforming them （by 'mixing his labor' with them， as Locke puts it） to make them his individual property。。。" You almost miss it。 Rothbard here makes a generalization here that is very weak。 The first is that while conceivably someone could go out， collect some reeds and make a basket by themselves this is not how capitalism works。 There's not one man who finds himself all the materials for a car in some valley， combines those component bits and then sells several million of them singlehandedly。 The second is that there are no "natural resources" down the street that you can simply go and collect。 It would certainly validate the libertarian ideal if there were just a bunch of unclaimed oil rigs or gold mines a la some civ simulator just ripe for the collecting that process pure gold， or refined oil。 Of particular interest here is Rothbard's complete and utter devotion to the Lockean concept of property despite the complete and utter disdain he has for the Lockean concept of the social contract expressed not so many pages before！The gist is that even using Rothbard's "Ruritania" analogy capitalism requires a state to exist and furthermore needs a state strong enough to ensure that a uniform currency is accepted， to ensure the continued operation of markets， and to protect property "rights。"I'm an unapologetic leftist and I didn't think that Rothbard would convince me otherwise- but， I expected a more rigorous text from someone considered to be an intellectual titan on the right to at least make me consider my own beliefs more thoroughly。 I admit that I have greatly overestimated Murray Rothbard's capabilities。 。。。more

Brooms ，

Interesting and concise， but I actually would have preferred if there was a little more content

Kaviya ，

In recent years I have been dissatisfied with the state apparatus and frankly lost hope in governance and justice， this book gives voice to my thoughts and fears。 The author dissects the role of state and it's intended purposes。 It was interesting to read about what crimes the state punish in earnest and was pretty surprised by the answers 。 I have never considered the role of the state from the author's perspective。 Even what I think the author is very rational for the major part if the book ， In recent years I have been dissatisfied with the state apparatus and frankly lost hope in governance and justice， this book gives voice to my thoughts and fears。 The author dissects the role of state and it's intended purposes。 It was interesting to read about what crimes the state punish in earnest and was pretty surprised by the answers 。 I have never considered the role of the state from the author's perspective。 Even what I think the author is very rational for the major part if the book ， I somehow find some of this theories a little too extreme。 Overall a intriguing read。 。。。more

Harrison Gourlay ，

Not much to say other than this is a brilliant overview of everything wrong with the State， and everything right with anarchy。 Should be required reading in every history class， if they were actually interested in teaching truth and not just propaganda。 5/5 stars。

Ostrava ，

I sometimes choose to read books I know I won't like or agree with。 I do this to challenge my own ideas and to see what I can do with them to improve them， or solidify their foundations。 Keep thinking at some point I will find a libertarian with anything to offer me but the search continues pointlessly。 The Austrians though are as hilariously bad as they seemed like， you would think that if these people were so important for the history of socioeconomics， they would offer conversation on the lev I sometimes choose to read books I know I won't like or agree with。 I do this to challenge my own ideas and to see what I can do with them to improve them， or solidify their foundations。 Keep thinking at some point I will find a libertarian with anything to offer me but the search continues pointlessly。 The Austrians though are as hilariously bad as they seemed like， you would think that if these people were so important for the history of socioeconomics， they would offer conversation on the level of fucking Reddit threads。 But they don't， because ancaps can't be taken seriously。Anyway， this book is funny。 Bunch of unfounded critiques on the state， sometimes leaning on interesting but largely unexplored/undemonstrated ideas。 An actual anarchist could have seen salvageable examples of state-criticism here and there。 But what turns the book into an absolute joke is:-it's lack of awareness of the hierarchies that would still be present and in fact are condoned through this ideology that continue to impose inequality over a largely afflicted population。-attempts at anthropology and the history of states that again fail to bring up anything other than the "FrEdOm" of choice one has to either wage your life away serving Happy Meals or starve to death。-a lack of definition for things like value， or labor or。。。 WELL， the groups of people and organizations left after you're done with your capitalist revolution。-the fact that it's missing an engaging philosophy of any kind。 -A complete mockery of taxation and what they're for。Why am I asking for sense to the school of economics that rejects empiricism though？ I'm not sure if I should approach capitalism through the lenses of the Austrians， I'm going to check on other groups next。 。。。more

David ，

Anatomy of the State by Murray N。 Rothbard presents his take on the state as a predatory entity that does not produce anything but steals resources from the producers。 The author poses the question of how the state sustains itself。 It must use propaganda methods to gain and maintain popular support for its policies。 The author does a great job in presenting concise points backed by thorough research and analysis in reaching his conclusions。 In his opinion based on his research he poses that of t Anatomy of the State by Murray N。 Rothbard presents his take on the state as a predatory entity that does not produce anything but steals resources from the producers。 The author poses the question of how the state sustains itself。 It must use propaganda methods to gain and maintain popular support for its policies。 The author does a great job in presenting concise points backed by thorough research and analysis in reaching his conclusions。 In his opinion based on his research he poses that of the various forms of government that humans have instituted over many centuries， and all of the various concepts that have been tried， none have been able to curtail the state's activities or to keep it in check。 The author also does an excellent job in footnoting and providing references to the sources he relied on that also point the reader to additional related materials。 。。。more

Mackenzie ，

On page 11， Rothbard attempts to briefly define the state as "that organization in society which attempts to maintain a monopoly of the use of force and violence in a given territorial area。。。""Oh， wow！" I responded， "I don't disagree with this！ That monopoly on violence is how the state maintains the hierarchies of capitalism and white supremacy！ I might actually like some of his critiques about how states maintain the illusion of power and legitimacy to the benefit of the bourg-""[I]n particul On page 11， Rothbard attempts to briefly define the state as "that organization in society which attempts to maintain a monopoly of the use of force and violence in a given territorial area。。。""Oh， wow！" I responded， "I don't disagree with this！ That monopoly on violence is how the state maintains the hierarchies of capitalism and white supremacy！ I might actually like some of his critiques about how states maintain the illusion of power and legitimacy to the benefit of the bourg-""[I]n particular，" Rothbard continues， "it is the only organization in society that obtains its revenue not by voluntary contribution or payment for services rendered but by coercion。""Oh。。。" I roll my eyes， "So your issue is those unjust hierarchies aren't unjust enough。 Got it。"The term "Capitalist Realism" was coined by Mark Fisher around the time Rothbard wrote "Anatomy of the State"， and refers to the condition under which a person can imagine no other way for the world to operate except through capitalism。 "Anatomy of the State" is so firmly entrenched in capitalist realism， the entire worldview proposed by it's author falls apart if you even momentarily question the exploitation of the working class。Rothbard asserts there are two ways to make money - producing it through labor （free market capitalism）， and stealing it （taxes） - conveniently ignoring how his definition of "labor" hides a split within it。 Labor， as he defines it， consists both of physical， actual labor （let's call people who earn money this way "working class"） and return on investment from capital （let's call people who earn money this way "bougeriouse" or just "the rich"）。 The bougeriouse， as has been pointed out by people far more famous and far more dead （for now） than I， do not actually have to work， they must merely be in possession of property。 There is nothing "default" about a system in which one group of people must work at the service of another， much smaller group。 And without this assumption， the idea that the taking of wealth from those the rich and redistributing it to the working class， who *actually* perform labor - or who are precluded from performing labor by how the incentives created by the very free market system Rothbard touts produce unemployment - is somehow an infringement on the natural state of human interaction is laughable on its face。I'm not a fan of "the state，" however， my critiques are so wholly divorced from Rothbard's that he might actually turn me into a statist （to clarify because I am writing on the internet: this was a joke）。 "Crony capitalism，" as those who believe the government's role is to interfere with the free market call it， is merely a result of the incentives created by capitalism。 Were there no state， the rich would create one to increase their ability to exploit the poor。 See the company towns which popped up in the era preceding the great depression。I agree with Rothbard in the assertion that the legitimacy of states is one of faith and fable， and artificial limits are only as effective insofar as the people in power are willing not to cross them。 I would， in fact， go farther and argue that the legitimacy of a state is truly only found in the power to enforce its rules by violence against those who disagree with its legitimacy。 And it is a horrifying limitation of democracy that minorities are subject to the good graces and support of those groups with power。 However， early on， the pamphlet reads this limitation as an indication that there is a complete severance of "the people" from "the state，" as if the latter were a completely autonomous entity moving and operating on its own。 There is a difference between democracy and a monarchy， oligarchy， theocracy， dictatorship， or any other form of government in which "the people" have no say or contribution。As Rothbard writes with the US government in mind， I agree the Constitution is a far-from-perfect document， which institutionalizes a number of horrible systems （prisons， imperialist military， anti-labor laws， unequal representation， voter suppression， the list goes on）。 There are severe limitations， many institutional， on what the working class can accomplish through US democracy， and against Rothbards assertions， the very notion that the government would ever willingly stray from a capitalist system。 Bernie Sanders， the representative of the "radical left" in the United States has never called for the expropriation of the means of production from the rich， Jeff Bezos may rest peacefully that he would own Amazon even if the "left" were to take power。 And if those billions are useful for anything， it's making sure there's lots of people in positions of power who will never vote to deprive him of the ability to earn millions while he sleeps。However， the work of activists （no to mention a Civil War） over the past two centuries has made society more democratic - again， far from perfectly， but far more than it has ever been - providing the first opportunity for the working class to bind the actions of the owners of capital within a governmental system rather than through direct action （Side note: I'm reminded of a scene from， of all things， Seth Green's Hulu show 'Crossing Swords'， in which the peasants are unhappy with a famine caused by the king， and his advisor points out that without democratic recourse， the peasants' first and last resort is violence）。That the working class would ever overthrow the state only to maintain the system of oppression by which they are forced to work for the benefit of the rich， presumably just pacifly accepting the conditions of squalor such a situation would create out of idealistic devotion free market capitalism over even their own well-being， is the fantasy of someone whose image of the world is so juvenile， he believed the criminal system （how's that going to exist without a state， Murray？） should be intentionally retributive， and a poor person who steals bread because they cannot afford to eat should be forced to pay twice the price （see his work on punishment and proportionality）。 Perhaps the poor person should have just stuck to the ideological convictions of free market capitalism and starved to death？There may be a day - I hope - when a state is not necessary， but whether the new organization of society benefits the working class or the rich is a point of complete and unmendable disagreement between myself and Mr。 Rothbard。I leave this review with a quote from Rosa Luxemburg's "Reform or Revolution，" written over half a century prior to this drek: "If democracy has become superfluous or annoying to the bourgeoisie， it is on the contrary necessary and indispensable to the working class。 It is necessary to the working class because it creates the political forms （autonomous administration， electoral rights， etc。） which will serve the proletariat as fulcrums in its task of transforming bourgeois society。 Democracy is indispensable to the working class because only through the exercise of its democratic rights， in the struggle for democracy， can the proletariat become aware of its class interests and its historic task。" 。。。more

Cosmictimetraveler ，

Excellent book。 Filled with 5 star material， but too short and lacking depth to be a true 5 star book。 However it suits its purpose， and the author has plenty of other books to expound upon his positions。

/Fitbrah/ ，

If the state is so bad why not just take power and make a cooler state。 You're never gonna just magically make all the state power disappear so why not put someone in charge who is a really cool guy and will let us trade GameStop stonks？ If the state is so bad why not just take power and make a cooler state。 You're never gonna just magically make all the state power disappear so why not put someone in charge who is a really cool guy and will let us trade GameStop stonks？ 。。。more

Amy ，

Just compete crapThe guy uses examples of tyranny and fascism in tyrannical and fascist governments （or tyrannical and fascist government officials lurking in liberal governments） to conclude that all governments are tyrannical and fascist。 It's sheer， illogical nonsense。。。。。。And most likely part of the required reading for being a complete knob。 Just compete crapThe guy uses examples of tyranny and fascism in tyrannical and fascist governments （or tyrannical and fascist government officials lurking in liberal governments） to conclude that all governments are tyrannical and fascist。 It's sheer， illogical nonsense。。。。。。And most likely part of the required reading for being a complete knob。 。。。more

Luke ，

I used to be an An-Cap， but then I read John Zerzan's Twilight of the Machines。 I used to be an An-Cap， but then I read John Zerzan's Twilight of the Machines。 。。。more

MuuhdistMonk ，

Very short book here。 This book explores what the State is and is not。 Rothbard explains how the State gains power over its subjects， how that power is maintained over the years， and the various failed attempts to limit that power。

Jean Finney ，

A family member literally stuffed this book in a pile of materials for me to read。 This book really has me thinking about the greater good and “the wizard of OZ”。 I’m still processing the content。

nero ，

The Anatomy of the State - also known as The Book of Footnotes。Surprisingly， I quite enjoyed this book， if mostly for its comedic value。 While I understand - and even agree with - some of the arguments Rothbard lays out （such as the issue posed by the judiciary， or the fact that most wars serve only the State， and never its people），most of what is written here is just him asserting that the existence of the State does not serve the individual in any way whatsoever， which is decidedly untrue。I d The Anatomy of the State - also known as The Book of Footnotes。Surprisingly， I quite enjoyed this book， if mostly for its comedic value。 While I understand - and even agree with - some of the arguments Rothbard lays out （such as the issue posed by the judiciary， or the fact that most wars serve only the State， and never its people），most of what is written here is just him asserting that the existence of the State does not serve the individual in any way whatsoever， which is decidedly untrue。I do however appreciate this work for what it is: an insight into the heart of anarcho-capitalist philosophy， which is， to put it simply: State bad。 State take money but no do things I like。 State very bad。 。。。more

Frank Deschain ，

The law is an ass。So many illustrations of the many ways that the almighty State is illegitimate and parasitic。 Great read！ It's a private company within itself， and checks and balances are done within its company。 Their interests are not the citizen's interests。 A politician comes along， strong personality， left or right， convinces them that their interests will be served。 But eventually it is revealed that they collude together。 The law is an ass。So many illustrations of the many ways that the almighty State is illegitimate and parasitic。 Great read！ It's a private company within itself， and checks and balances are done within its company。 Their interests are not the citizen's interests。 A politician comes along， strong personality， left or right， convinces them that their interests will be served。 But eventually it is revealed that they collude together。 。。。more

Jason Carter ，

"The state is that organization in society which attempts to maintain a monopoly of the use of force and violence in a given territorial area; in particular， it is the only organization in society that obtains its revenue not by voluntary contribution or payment for services rendered but by coercion。"This quote from the first chapter is perhaps misplaced， since that chapter is entitled，" What the State is Not" and this quote explains what the state *is*。 Which happens to be the title of the seco "The state is that organization in society which attempts to maintain a monopoly of the use of force and violence in a given territorial area; in particular， it is the only organization in society that obtains its revenue not by voluntary contribution or payment for services rendered but by coercion。"This quote from the first chapter is perhaps misplaced， since that chapter is entitled，" What the State is Not" and this quote explains what the state *is*。 Which happens to be the title of the second chapter， but I digress。。。Seven short chapters。 55 pages。 Perhaps a long essay rather than a book。 But most of Rothbard's political philosophy， it seems， flows from the understanding expressed in the quote above。 He dismantle the common misunderstandings of the nature of the state， demonstrating along the way that those understandings are exactly those that the force-monopolists desire to be widespread and why they link up with the intellectual class symbiotically to perpetuate the myths。So much truth in such a little tome。 。。。more

Jocris ，

Short and perfect

Darren Poe ，

The state is a parasite。

Kishan ，

An Absolute Cracker。 An essential for a Libertarian Philosopher。 Much Needed for days like today。

Ryan Phillips ，

needs to be required reading in high school

Seburath ，

Get it at https://mises。org/library/anatomy-stateThis short essay compiles a great analysis of the state as the crime organization that it is， the best summary would be condensed on this quote:"The State has never been created by a “social contract”; it has always been born in conquest and exploitation。"I hope everyone could read it， it's only 52 pages！ Get it at https://mises。org/library/anatomy-stateThis short essay compiles a great analysis of the state as the crime organization that it is， the best summary would be condensed on this quote:"The State has never been created by a “social contract”; it has always been born in conquest and exploitation。"I hope everyone could read it， it's only 52 pages！ 。。。more

Daniel Simões ，

Excelente leitura。 Curta， simples e direto ao ponto。Ótimo desmistificador do que é o Estado。

Reference

google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Anatomy of the State

hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Anatomy of the State&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft

The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Anatomy of the State&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0