It's strange. In some past courses dealing with modern history, students in the class have regarded this definition of the state as absolutely obvious and unworthy of further comment. In other sections of the same course, however, the members (or at least a significant subset of them) resisted this definition with vigorous emotional intensity. Somehow these resisters wanted badly to believe that the state is based on something other than brute force--human kindness perhaps? When I pressed them with specific questions, some even claimed that the majority of citizens would pay their full share of taxes even if doing so was not required by law. Strangely, none were willing to do away with police forces, though in a society in which people willingly and voluntarily pay 30-40% of their incomes as taxes, it hardly seems that we would need police.