You repeated the second paragraph twice.

Actually, it was in the Stalinist Soviet Union that right-wing ideology was "scientifically" proven to be a psychopathological result, and this occured to serve the purposes of the only existing totalitarian party in USSR.

My comment is that maybe right-wing ideology in its base and healthy form (patriotism) is actually an indicator of virtue for the person who chooses to adopt it.

Left wing ideology, in its ill form, reveals the envy of the lower person for the higher. The obsession that someone is rich because he has exploited others and not naturally because he was born with it/worked more to get it/out of luck,etc. has led the Communist masses to murder every rich person in a paranoid mass judgement in Russia. The envy for the rich, the direction of the bad feeling of poverty into becoming a pure hate towards the higher or even the middle class, are psychopathological phenomenons in the collective psyche of communist masses. This feelings were created by their leaders as the absolute truth, not leting people realize it was only due to their misfortune and fate that they happened to be born poor....

It's not ridiculous to try to study the relationship between personality and ideology, but the history of such attempts (e.g., the 1940s "authoritarian personality" study) is not promising due to the tendency of the researchers to have enormous axes to grind.

Here's one approach that might be more conducive to actually learning something useful, because it fights against the tendency toward bias against the other side: Try to find kinds of people on the left and right who have similar personalities.

For example, historian Jim Chapin suggested that the kind of young men who riot at anti-globalist demonstrations or engage in ecoterrorism are the same personality types as the kind of of young men who join the Marines or the Michigan Militia -- they just happened to be born into middle class leftist millieus that didn't provide them with organized outlets for their innate aggression and hostility. If they'd been switched at birth into, say, white working class homes, they'd have been happy playing football and beating up homosexuals for kicks.

Another example: What personality traits do obsessive Clinton haters and obsessive Bush haters share? How do they differ?

Who on the left are Ayn Randers most similar to?

I've worked in politics for some time and I'm fascinated by the evolutionary aspects of human nature as exhibited in political behavior. I definitely agree with the tendency for arch-conservatives to be compulsive and disagreeable. Having mostly worked on the left, I would like to see a study of the maladaptive characteristics of ultra-liberalism, which in my experience tend toward incapacitation (depression) and passive resistance. I also think that any study of post-WWII liberalism should avoid focusing too much on statism as that manifestation of liberalism (at least in America) is now secondary to post-modern lifestyle liberalism. You're more likely to get people excited about gay rights and smoking bans than unionization or single-payer healthcare.