“The modern state, in its essence and objectives, is necessarily a military state, and a military state necessarily becomes an aggressive state. If it does not conquer others it will itself be conquered, for the simple reason that wherever force exists, it absolutely must be displayed or put into action. From this again it follows that the modern state must without fail be huge and powerful; that is the indispensable condition for its preservation.”
Source: Statism and Anarchy (1873)
Help us to complete the source, original and additional information
Mikhail Bakunin 63
Russian revolutionary, philosopher, and theorist of collect… 1814–1876Related quotes
Chap. 1 : The Legacy of War
Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945 (2005)

"The Creative Process" (1962) originally published in The National Culture Center's Creative America (1962) and later published in The Price of the Ticket (1985)

Living in Truth (1986), An Anatomy of Reticence

“Once on the road of terrorism, the State necessarily becomes estranged from the people.”
"The Bolshevik Myth" in Anarchism : A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas, Vol. 1 (2005) edited by Robert Graham, p. 312. <!-- Montreal: Black Rose Books -->
Context: Terrorism is tempting with its tremendous possibilities. It offers a mechanical solution, as it were, in hopeless situations. … the principles of terrorism unavoidably rebound to the fatal injury of liberty and revolution. Absolute power corrupts and defeats its partisans no less than its opponents. A people that knows not liberty becomes accustomed to dictatorship: fighting despotism and counter-revolution, terrorism itself becomes their efficient school. Once on the road of terrorism, the State necessarily becomes estranged from the people.

"The Journal of the Brothers de Goncourt," Fortnightly Review (October 1888).

Power and the Useful Economist (1973)
Context: When the modern corporation acquires power over markets, power in the community, power over the state and power over belief, it is a political instrument, different in degree but not in kind from the state itself. To hold otherwise — to deny the political character of the modern corporation — is not merely to avoid the reality. It is to disguise the reality. The victims of that disguise are those we instruct in error. The beneficiaries are the institutions whose power we so disguise. Let there be no question: economics, so long as it is thus taught, becomes, however unconsciously, a part of the arrangement by which the citizen or student is kept from seeing how he or she is, or will be, governed.