anonymous question

I sincerely do not understand why one specific variety of product causes such a number of questions, while other varieties are not given such attention. Who, under libertarianism, will get the currently state-owned stockpiles of chemical weapons, who will get the nuclear ones, who will get the biological ones, who will get the multiple launch rocket systems, and who will get the strategic canned meat from twenty years ago?

The state, by its very nature, opposes the free market; therefore, it regularly produces all sorts of crap that no one gives a fuck about on the free market, but is very necessary for the state in order to dominate and show off. Then it goes bankrupt, and the question arises: who is willing to pay even a few pennies for this national treasure, and is this “who” a dangerous asshole who wants to use this treasure not only to show off (which is a clear and legitimate market incentive), but also to dominate.
The most market-efficient solution during the liquidation of a state is to offload the dangerous movable property of the deceased power to some neighboring state that hasn’t had time to die yet. Firstly, only a state is capable of paying some reasonable money for this illiquid asset, and secondly, by buying such shit, it will die faster, so its current citizens will get some indirect strategic profit from this.

Nevertheless, one must assume that various strategic junk will be scavenged in significant quantities by whoever happens to be around, and there will be no one to stop it. Some will go to collectors, some to paranoids, some to various DIY tinkerers who will manage to find a use for the junk in their backyard workshops. But terrorists will also want to acquire some. However, this, again, will be a problem for those states that still remain, or for certain groups similar to states in their methods of operation, even if they do not possess some state attributes. It is states that are the first and primary target of terrorists, not people or corporations.

Nevertheless, it is people who suffer from the actions of terrorists, and therefore, I believe, in a free libertarian society there will be some market demand for the disposal of various weapons of mass destruction, and this will also help to mitigate some of the harm from them. Someone clears territories of debris, someone deals with mine clearing, someone dismantles missiles in silos—and this increases the value of the territory since it reduces the risks of managing it.