Sometimes people like to imagine a stateless state, they call this anarchy. Problem is, the way that it is imagined is unrealistic.

Ever since the dawn of mankind men have organized in tribes and nations big or small and subjugated themselves to authorities who dictate the minutia of their lives.

Anarchy is the organic state, it's the law of the jungle. It continues to exist even today in the concrete jungles. Our level of subjugation determines how derealized anarchy is or has become.

Order and chaos live side by side, it's a symbiosis. The government would have you believe that everything is under control. Yet, all one need to do is turn on the news or roll through a stop sign to realize that everything is not under control.

It's kind of like pure communism and pure capitalism. There are only degrees, America is not purely capitalist. Evidence of that is social security, income taxation, and collectivized health care.

Neither is China pure communistic when you compare the PRC to the mainland. I'm sure there are also some extraordinarily unequally wealthy people on China's mainland as well.

Point being the notion of a stateless state is the idea that non-force can be organized and controlled.

That type of absolute non-control control couldn't be achieved any more than a government could exercise control control because the levers of power would always be in the hands of imperfect men.

Allot of this is subjective too. For example, Kim Jong Ill's government is mostly capitalistic if you put yourself in his shoes, as he is capitalizing to the max off of the backs of his subjects.

If you put yourself in the shoes of one of those who have been forcibly, or voluntarily, or by means of Stockholm syndrome subjugated to him. Then your perception of his government would be that it's highly communistic.