^Edward Stringham, Anarchy and the law: the political economy of choice,p 51
^David D. Friedman, The machinery of freedom: guide to a radical capitalism, Edition 2, Open Court, 1995, p. 19: "sometimes called anarcho-capitalism, or libertarian anarchy". ISBN 978-0-8126-9069-9
^"A student and disciple of the Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises, rothbard combined the laissez-faire economics of his teacher with the absolutist views of human rights and rejection of the state he had absorbed from studying the individualist American anarchists of the nineteenth century such as Lysander Spooner and Benjamin Tucker." Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political Thought, 1987, ISBN 978-0-631-17944-3, p. 290
^ Rothbard, Murray. (1982). The Ethics of Liberty. New York and London: New York University Press. 本書の全内容
^ 原文: lf the State may be said to properly own its territory, then it is proper for it to make rules for anyone who presumes to live in that area. lt can legitimately seize or control private property because there is no private property in its area, because it really owns the entire land surface. So long as the State permits its subjects to leave its territory, then, it can be said to act as does any other owner who sets down rules for people living on his property.
(...)But our homesteading theory, outlined above, suffices to demolish any such pretensions by the State apparatus.
^ Rothbard, Murray. (1982). The Ethics of Liberty. New York and London: New York University Press Chapter22 pp.172
^Mckay, Iain (2008年). “An Anarchist FAQ – section F.1”. Edinburgh and Oakland: AK Press. 2025年3月20日時点のオリジナルよりアーカイブ。2025年6月10日閲覧。 “Of course, it would be churlish to point out that the usual name for a political system in which the owner of a territory is also its ruler is, in fact, monarchy. Which suggests that while "anarcho"-capitalism may be called "anarcho-statism" a far better term could be "anarcho-monarchism.”
^ 原文：The difference between libertarians and non-libertarians is not about whether aggression is permissible. Instead, it’s about what counts as aggression, or about just who has a right to what.
^原文：Now, this contradiction can be solved in only one way — the users of the "given area" are also its owners. In other words, a system of possession (or "occupancy and use") as favoured by anarchists. However, Rothbard is a capitalist and supports private property, non-labour income, wage labour, capitalists and landlords. This means that he supports a divergence between ownership and use and this means that this "ultimate decision-making power" extends to those who use, but do not own, such property (i.e. tenants and workers). The statist nature of private property is clearly indicated by Rothbard’s words — the property owner in an "anarcho"-capitalist society possesses the "ultimate decision-making power" over a given area, which is also what the state has currently. Rothbard has, ironically, proved by his own definition that "anarcho"-capitalism is not anarchist.
^Cohen, G.A. (1995). Self-Ownership, Freedom, and Equality. New York: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 2. pp.39
^原文:The problem is in most people’s minds “fraud” basically means misrepresenting the truth—i.e., lying. But clearly merely lying is not a rights violation. I think imprecise use of “fraud” permits it to be used to arrive at unlibertarian conclusions.(...)
