To be fair, that also applies that to extreme left wing ideologies as well. Higher IQ individuals are more individualistic and resist group think more effectively than others. The only reason they conform is because they'll get ostracized and in extreme cases, killed. >>13278728
Both of your points for leftism and rightism are why I've been dabbling in Libertarianism, though I don't really fully believe it.
The 'natural world' does indeed seem to have hits of right wing in it: Nature is brutal and competitive, natural societies tend to be religious (even tribes like the Aborigines and the San people have some degree of spirituality and probably have no atheists) and societies with a culture or some kind of cohesion tend to build much strength (despite how primitive this might seem to centrists and lefitists). Right wing thought is grounded in stability of being close to the idea of 'self-evident' truths. This stability has the advantage of making the adherents better at 'everyday' things, but has the disadvantage of stagnating them and throwing in them arduous struggles against new circumstances.
Leftism however, has the advantage of the 'imagination', 'what could be' and 'the new'. That's why many scientists tend to lean left (not all). Leftist ideas tend to also want to 'control' things and 'plan them out'. Leftism seeks to 'unify' under universal needs and desires. Leftism is indeed somewhat 'unnatural', but it is meant to be 'unnatural'. The main idea I'm getting from leftism is that it seeks to free mankind from the 'oppression of nature'. >>13278848>Actual nerds are right wing.
Debatable. There are nerds from all walks of life. During my time in my university's computing school, a good chunk of the students were more 'libertarian' than conservative. They didn't give a two shits about religion, LGBT activity on campus, etc. In fact, they hated a lot of government intervention period.