<center>https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c8/2c/44/c82c4470d4b8a51a3ba8d37a467776fc.jpg</center>

<div class="text-justify">&#8195;First of all, it is the change from an external motivation to an internal one. That is, as have written the classics of libertarianism: the main thing is personal interest. It is natural that it is primarily material. But not only material – it may be just an interest. If I’m not interested in stupid yachts and trinkets, I’m not less libertarian than the others. But, for example, I’m interested in prolongation of life. So much that I intend to earn money for this purpose. If the worst comes to the worst, I mean, if the Gilgamesh project will fail, I can spend this money on charity.</div>
<br>
<div class="text-justify">&#8195;All forms of resentment and envy are total stupid. Someone has a lot of money. So, it means that he’s interested in that. And someone does not. Hence, his interests are different. If you really are interested in money, yachts and other “Louboutens”, you can find an opportunity and earn. If you can not earn, you have no right to take it by force. It’s cheating (crooked gambling), and what do they do with a cheater? He’s usually beaten by a candelabrum on the head. In this way real libertarians should treat with a cheat. Real meritocracy is possible only when this condition is met. Meritocracy is a long-felt need – otherwise we will not be able to cope with technologies. But the tendency to use physical violence without any excuse (just because one is not in the mood to work or is envious) hangs on the feet of humanity like a fucking weight on a convict.</div>
<br>
<div class="text-justify">&#8195;And one more point is the opposite resentment expressed by a dumb phrase “if you are so smart, then why are you so poor?” That is, a person is judged only on his material wealth. This is also stupid. Dichotomy should not be “rich-poor”, but “by what motivation is guided – external or internal”. A libertarian can be a middle-class person, even a beggar. At the same time, a person can receive substantial sums simply by robbing someone. He, naturally, can not be considered a libertarian. Protecting them and falling into wild enthusiasm over near-state oligarchs, thieves, robbers, murderers and other statists is unworthy for a freedom admirer.</div>