“The state is not “abolished,” it withers away.”

But this contradiction is a living thing and wholly reflects the Marxist dialectic. <br class="br">Address to the 16th Congress of the Russian Communist Party (1930) Quoted in: Alfred B. Evans, Soviet Marxism-Leninism: The Decline of an Ideology pg. 39 https://books.google.com/books?id=ezGGPIze4ZYC&amp;pg=PA39&amp;dq=withering+away+of+the+state+stalin&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ved=0CCAQ6AEwAWoVChMIz_WZ46adxwIVR5YeCh1g7AKD#v=onepage&amp;q=withering%20away%20of%20the%20state%20stalin&amp;f=false <br class="br">Stalin&#x27;s speeches, writings and authorised interviews

Source: Reflections on Violence (1908), p. 170

"Father Severyan", in November 1916: The Red Wheel: Knot II (1984; translation 1999).
Context: At no time has the world been without war. Not in seven or ten or twenty thousand years. Neither the wisest of leaders, nor the noblest of kings, nor yet the Church — none of them has been able to stop it. And don't succumb to the facile belief that wars will be stopped by hotheaded socialists. Or that rational and just wars can be sorted out from the rest. There will always be thousands of thousands to whom even such a war will be senseless and unjustified. Quite simply, no state can live without war, that is one of the state's essential functions. … War is the price we pay for living in a state. Before you can abolish war you will have to abolish all states. But that is unthinkable until the propensity to violence and evil is rooted out of human beings. The state was created to protect us from evil. In ordinary life thousands of bad impulses, from a thousand foci of evil, move chaotically, randomly, against the vulnerable. The state is called upon to check these impulses — but it generates others of its own, still more powerful, and this time one-directional. At times it throws them all in a single direction — and that is war.

Tariq Ali, How Bush Used 9/11 to Remap the World. CounterPunch, 8 July 2002.
Empire, About Empire

Source: Man, the State, and War (1959), Chapter V, Some Implications Of The Second Image, p. 127

In response to a statement by Abigail Thernstrom, Remarks in a Townhall Meeting on Race at the E.J. Thomas Performing Arts Hall at the University of Akron, Akron, Ohio (December 3, 1997). "http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=53654 Remarks in a Townhall Meeting on Race in Akron]," December 3, 1997.
1990s

The Libertarian as Conservative (1984)
Context: You might object that what I’ve said may apply to the minarchist majority of libertarians, but not to the self-styled anarchists among them. Not so. To my mind a right-wing anarchist is just a minarchist who’d abolish the state to his own satisfaction by calling it something else. But this incestuous family squabble is no affair of mine. Both camps call for partial or complete privatization of state functions but neither questions the functions themselves. They don’t denounce what the state does, they just object to who’s doing it. This is why the people most victimized by the state display the least interest in libertarianism. Those on the receiving end of coercion don’t quibble over their coercers’ credentials. If you can’t pay or don’t want to, you don’t much care if your deprivation is called larceny or taxation or restitution or rent. If you like to control your own time, you distinguish employment from enslavement only in degree and duration.

Introduction : The Libertarian Tradition http://www.bopsecrets.org/rexroth/communalism1.htm <br class="br">Communalism (1974) <br class="br">Context: Prior to 1918 the word “communism” did not mean Left Social Democracy of the sort represented by the Russian Bolsheviks, a radical, revolutionary form of State socialism. Quite the contrary, it was used of those who wished in one way or another to abolish the State, who believed that socialism was not a matter of seizing power, but of doing away with power and returning society to an organic community of non-coercive human relations. They believed that this was what society was naturally, and that the State was only a morbid growth on the normal body of oeconomia, the housekeeping of the human family, grouped in voluntary association. Even the word “socialism” itself was originally applied to the free communist communities which were so common in America in the nineteenth century.

Politics, Volume I, p. 74.