Anarchy has never been tried successfully, so that proves that the state is necessary.
Many statists demand that anarchists show a successfully anarchic society before they will even consider that life without a state is even possible, let alone desireable. There are two problems with this fallacy:
- The argument against statism isn't a consequentialist argument, but a moral argument. No one has the right to rule anyone else. It would be like arguing that a slavery-free society is impossible because there are no successful slavery-free societies.
It is completely untrue that anarchy has never been tried and was never successful. To back up this claim, I refer you to Daniel Hawkins' excellent series, appropriately named Anarchy - Never Been Tried?
- By definition the only "flourishing" that takes place in any country is from voluntary trade and production. Coercion (the tool of the state) does not create wealth, it just moves it around. Thus it follows the less coercion and this government you have to voluntary trade, the wealthier a society; and any "nation" that produces anything does so through "anarchic" actions.