Technically, it's not the state. It's collective ownership by the workers over the means of production. Marxism is different than libertarian Socialism in its implementation, but both are forms of Socialism. Proudhon and Marx disagreed.
Also, Communism is technically stateless, although I don't really know how this can actually be realized in the real world as even democratic processes require some instrument to enact the result of those outcomes.
This is a very coherent definition, also pointing out that Marx is not the creator of Socialism, and the original big names of Socialism disagreed with Marx's idea of a large state.
Proudhorn, Bakunin both disagreed with Marx, it was the Bolsheviks 50 years later in 1917 who took Marx a few steps farther and created the "vanguard Party" which is just asking for corruption/tyrrany. Enter Stalin and the whole thing turned to a totalitarian nightmare, just as Bakunin told Marx it would turn into and got "uninvited" to the Communist's meetings for criticizing Marx. (2nd Internationale) back in the 1870s.
Libertarian Socialism a la Bakunin/Proudhorn is the democratic sustainable government of the future. They were ahead of their times though. With vastly improved communications and automation it will be possible soon, if not now.
Bakunin is remembered as a major figure in the history of (small a) anarchism/Socialism and an opponent of Marxism, especially of Marx's idea of dictatorship of the proletariat. He continues to be an influence on modern-day Libertarian Socialists.
If we taught any part of this history (which won us a lot of victories such as 8hr workdays) of Socialism besides the marxist-reactionary 20th century USSRofFail you guys would understood why modern (and even back in the 1800s!) day Socialists/Anarchists/Communists/Lefties/Even US Democrats (who are still marginally left) reject Marxism and the Russian Bolshevik thing as a whole, while still being leftists.
So much easier to rewrite history of the left into marxism for political gain. Educate yourselves and turn glenn beck off. He doesn't know shit about history. Life/history cannot be summed up in "common sense" catch-phrases.
The elephant in the center of the room is stalinist/maoist dictatorships. That give Socialism it's terrible name.
A lot do not know of the Russian Revoloution. The Bolsheviks and their ultra-right ideology of Marxism won, but Libertarian Socialists fought the Bolsheviks, but as it is easier to set up a authoritarian dictatorship then a cooperative democratic state in a craphole backwater state of Russia back then bolsheviks backstabbed their leftist "comrades" and sapped "all power to the soviets". Even Marx said socialism could not be realized in Russia back then. That is without at least Germany/USA/UK back then having a revolution also. (Anyone heard of Rosa Luxembourg here?)
The Libertarian Socialists were sent to the gulags or deported, The USSR was founded. A lot do not know this was Trotsky who did this to the Democratic supporting leftists, not even Lenin or Stalin had the cajones to slap the leftists international community in the face so early on in the Russian Revolution leading to worldwide leftist community rejecting the USSR by the early 20s.