Many liberally minded citizens criticize the Russian authorities for failing to take proper sanitary measures against the coronavirus. They claim that at that rare moment when a firm hand of authority was actually needed, it did not appear; instead, the authorities carelessly and unprofessionally let the situation run its course, introducing some local restrictions and leaving measures up to the regions, etc., causing the epidemic to spread to terrifying proportions. Meanwhile, under ancap, the adoption of any restrictive, mandatory measures is fundamentally impossible! How should this be handled?
Minarchist
Using the current bedlam as an example, we can see very clearly: states are incapable of dealing with a pandemic because while one man’s war is another’s windfall—for politicians, the more global the mess, the more convenient the opportunity to profit from government procurement, and the more convenient the opportunity to restrict the freedom of citizens. If people themselves are whining for a firm hand, how can anyone resist the urge to shove that firm hand deeper into the citizen’s pocket?
Let’s compare this with ancap, where states are absent, all ultimate responsibility for one’s own health lies with the people, and if you don’t take care of yourself, you have only yourself to blame.
Some would have been entirely voluntarily insured against infectious diseases and accidents; some, having heirs, would have also insured their lives. If ancap has existed on the planet for a long time, then such insured individuals would make up some stable, significant percentage. But since such a misfortune has occurred that quite a few people are beginning to be infected by a previously unknown virus, this will generate additional demand for health insurance, and the prices for such insurance will spike.
Different insurance companies may act using different means. Some simply pay for treatment under policies within the limits of the insurance premium. Others realize that if nothing is done, all reserves will be spent on paying insurance claims, and to avoid bankruptcy—they should incentivize clients not to get infected. They begin offering payment for every day of self-isolation, plus remote supply of everything necessary (especially to high-risk groups). A third group of companies invests in the development of a treatment protocol. A fourth—in the development of vaccines.
But insurance companies are not the only players in the market. Pharma companies, even without insurance, understand that they can make a lot of money now, and they also begin seeking remedies for the new plague, or increasing the production of existing and well-working ones (more accurately, those in demand on the market, which in general is not the same thing).
In short, entrepreneurial initiative, unrestrained by government shackles, revitalizes sectors of the economy related to health care. What happens to other sectors? And what could possibly happen to them? Who will forbid tourists from flying to a quiet, pleasant place for a vacation? They get insured so as not to wander in an unfamiliar place in confusion about where and how to get treatment if something happens—and they fly. Who will forbid restaurants from operating? No one will forbid them. True, people themselves may enter with caution—which means they need to launch advertising about how safe the establishment is: here is a hand sanitizer, here are tables on an open terrace, here are waiters in masks.
And so on. What will be the result? Simply that throughout the world, the pandemic will proceed roughly as it did in Sweden, perhaps just a little bit better.
And, of course, no one will be able to prevent an investigation into where the virus came from. And if it turns out to be the work of some private laboratory, those guys will go bankrupt from lawsuits. Naturally, payments will not go to everyone, but only to those who managed to sue first—well, no one stopped them from searching, it’s only fair. As for other laboratories, realizing that they will now all be suspected, they will be forced to introduce very advanced standards of openness, otherwise, they won’t be able to work peacefully. And what is there to hide, if intellectual property is not valued under ancap? This means one must work not for the sake of rapid patenting, but for the sake of rapid implementation, in conditions where everyone sees each other and everyone adopts what they can from each other. This is a perfectly fair race, and it is strange to think that they would somehow stop participating in it due to the absence of patents.

– Hvala vam puno
(translated from Montenegrin: What, an epidemic, really? Then I’ll have another cup.)

