"It is unfortunately none too well understood that, just as the State has no money of its own, so it has no power of its own. All the power it has is what society gives it, plus what it confiscates from time to time on one pretext or another; there is no other source from which State power can be drawn. Therefore every assumption of State power, whether by gift or seizure, leaves society with so much less power; there is never, nor can be, any strengthening of State power without a corresponding and roughly equivalent depletion of social power."
--Albert Jay Nock, Our Enemy, the State

A little too libertarian for my taste. The political community is not our enemy, but one of our greatest goods.

there is no other source from which State power can be drawn.

Can't state power be drawn from state power? That is what seems to be the case with the Bush admin's wiretapping issue. The state drew more power from it's own inherent powers, or something.

Ralph,

I am by no means a Nock expert, I have read more about him than I have read of him, but I believe he was not anti-government or tending to anarchism, as most libertarians seem to be. I think he is making use of the capitalized term "State" in a much more specific sense, one that does not mean to imply that all forms of government or political community are bad, but only the unitary sovereign of the modern (Hobbesian) State.

What I am curious to learn more about is how Nock understands "social power" since he opposes to the State, "society." So, for example, how does he handle the issue of social heterogeneity?

Just to add to Brian's point: Nock differentiated between government and "the State." The former he found necessary and the latter he destested. "Our Enemy, the State" provides Nock's definitions for these terms, which elsewhere are often used interchangably.

I stand corrected. To be honest, I've never heard of Nock (surprise, surprise). I was hasty in my remarks (such is the blog format; speak now or move to the bottom of the page); on review, his distinction between "state" and "society" should have clued me in.

By the way, a blessed Ash Wednesday to you all.

I don't think my comment contradicts your initial comment. You may indeed find Nock "too libertarian." But he's not an anarchist, as his distinction between "the State" and "government" demonstrates. Nock is an interesting fellow, in that he was part of that pre-WWII group of conservatives that a great number of present-day conservatives imagine out of existence. Alas, they existed and left some pretty good books--Our Enemy, the State being one--as evidence.