In defense of the area in control of a state, history has shown that near extermination of its male population in total war is not out of the question, so the belief that a state has a net positive impact on the well-being of its citizens is a rather unfounded one. While the state’s action against violence and destruction of property are, at this stage, unconvincing, a more voluntary system of governance could, in theory, help on this issue future societies, at least in progress to a true free market.

The idea that the state can provide services and other advantages to its citizens that did not previously exist is in contrast to the arguments of state protection—a fallacy that ought to be dismissed outright. Infrastructure, healthcare, and other services that the political state must produce are not, in fact, produced by the state, but by private individuals. This is no great insight, but offers us a way to understand how the state procures these “goods” from its citizens.