This quote implies that for peace to prevail among nations, the power and influence of the state should be strictly limited. The state, in this context, refers to the government or the political entity with the power to make and enforce laws. The quote suggests that the more power a state has, the more likely it is to interfere with or control the affairs of other nations, which can lead to conflict and disrupt peace.

In essence, the quote is an endorsement of minimal government intervention or what’s often referred to as laissez-faire politics. It suggests that when states mind their own business and allow the free market and civil society to function without undue interference, there is a higher likelihood of peaceful coexistence among nations.

Applying this idea to today’s world, it could be argued that countries with strong, interventionist governments are often involved in international conflicts. For instance, nations with expansive military power often engage in wars or political interference in other countries, which disrupts global peace. On the other hand, countries with limited state control and high levels of freedom often enjoy more peaceful relationships with other nations.

On a personal development level, this quote could be interpreted as a call for self-reliance and individual freedom. Just as peace among nations is more likely when states limit their power, individuals may find more peace and fulfillment when they limit the influence of external forces (like societal expectations or peer pressure) on their lives. This could mean pursuing personal interests and goals rather than following a prescribed path, or making decisions based on personal values rather than external influences.

In conclusion, this quote promotes the idea of limiting state power as a means to achieve peace among nations. It suggests that less interference from the state in both international affairs and individual lives can lead to more harmonious relationships and personal fulfillment.