As the Bell Curve by Charles Murray shows, wealth has a high correlation with both IQ and emotional intelligence.
As every libertarian does know the intelectual principle that underlies all human rights is the right to own things or people (i.e. self-ownership principle) through the mechanism of self-enforced self-defended private property.
A requisite for owning wealth is the ability to govern that wealth, as idle wealth is ownerless, for example, an asteroid with deposits of precious ores or uncolonised land.
An animal cannot own property, but a computer can, as animals are unintelligent creatures, and intelligence is what defines humanity.
This is why poorfags are closer to beast than to us.
Ayn Rand was wrong.
Not only poor people are not entitled to our wealth, WE are entitled to THEIR wealth as the animals they are cannot hold property.
Eugenics are good by definition, because income has a high correlation with intelligence, those who are richer are more human than those poorer, thus, any behaviour should be allowed to those in the top, maybe with the exception of degeneracy and charity.
And while it is true that soon Gene Therapy will become avalaible, only us can afford it, so eugenics are still useful to keep poorfags in their rightful place.
People who oppose us, like socialists, vegans or vegan socialists are "people" who want things like taxation, animal rights based on "painism", private charities, human rights not based upon property rights, atheism or antichristianism, labour unions, the abolition of slavery or other any other form of collective delusions.
Effective altruism and charities are not only defective by definiton, but also impossible, as they not only promotes dysgenics, but create an unnatural redistribution of wealth, which should stopped at all cost.
Socialists, liberals and far-left collectivists alike may, in rare occasions, have an intelligence high enough to hold property, however, they are clearly mentally ill, as they contradict the very own property rights that allows them to exist in the first place, thus, removing them from society or turning them into propety would be merely an act of self-defense, I know, I know, it is sad to harm intelligent individuals, even in self defense, but sometimes you have to appeal to common sense and fall into the grounds of some necessary evils, so to speak.
For more info, feel free to Emil Kierkegaard, Scott Alezander or Spandrell blogs on the topic.
>how can I help?
You can promote corruption at a goverment level so people distrusts more the welfare state.
It is easier to attack disabled, homosexual or homeless vermin as not even subhumans like them care about them (hint: the mentally ill are especially easy).
Boicot charities and promote big corporations.
Censor leftists or "right"-wingers who promote utilitarianism, atheism or painism.
Promote dysgenics and use the optics they provide to make leftists look bad, to make them look as the degenerates they truly are afterall.
Godspeed my heros, see you all in our future libertarian utopia.