For Each Point of IQ Divergence, Upwards or Downwards, Those Further Divergent, Have Greater Incentive to Push for Freedom-For-Aggression...

...but for very different reasons. The high-end outliers are frustrated by democracy, facts of reality which can't be obliviated by reconceptualizing an elegant theory, and perhaps their own personal incongruities relative to what can go over with the multitude. For each point further out that they are, they will tend to feel it more acutely that they have the answers; that utopia can be stormed with allowance of enough freedom for official aggression, forcefully removing obstacles to their cardboard character notion of a theoretically ideal state. The bourgeoisie is more likely to then be seen as the major obstacle, while the poor and the retarded are more likely to be regarded as allies in the push for freedom-for-aggression, and increasingly so for each point of IQ divergence, in BOTH directions away from the middle. The retarded, for each point of IQ down that they are, have greater incentive to shift status competition towards ruthless and self-destructive violence, but at all events away from contests where the higher-IQ tend to dominate, and this means wanting more freedom-for-aggression for each point down. Now we have a common ground between the high and low, against the middle. The high end need maximal aggression to force through the elegant and purified, yet democratically non-comestible, theoretical approach. Does all this illuminate how it is that the Left everywhere is a coalition of the high school dropouts and the PhD's, or the high and low of conceptual ability?