The market aspects are fairly libertarian but the characters themselves do not represent an an-cap (libertarian anarchist) ideology. There is no real discussion about the use of violence and when it is justifiable (what libertarianism essentially is). The main female character seems to be a black flag who doesn't really care what anarchist system comes into place but organizes mainly labor groups for revolutionary actions. I am also pretty sure they call it each other comrade. Prof is a pacifist anarchist (or something like that) where he believes he has full right to do anything and anyone else has full right to do anything. He notes at one point that he would not stop someone with violence if they tried to stop him because that violates his view of anarchy.

Neither of those two ideas really have anything to do with libertarianism. Many of the people around them just seem to be anti-earth but not necessarily anarchists. Again, they don't even have an articulable anarchist position (which is very left-anarchist).

It may have some through points with libertarianism, but any one who has a serious understanding of the subject would have to reaching to say the ideas espoused by the characters get you to a Rothbardian natural rights view of property.

If you are talking about libertarian anarchism what else is there but voluntarism/anarcho-capitalism? Everything else would necessitate some kind of state in a libertarian view so that could not be libertarian anarchism.

I think this book takes a similar spot near 1984 in that it does not promote any single coherently identifiable political view but very clearly opposes several identifiable political positions.