in keeping with posting anything, and obviously this was never intended for posting

so from the Ayn Rand Institute, "Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism. It is the notion of ascribing moral, social or political significance to a man's genetic lineage—the notion that a man's intellectual and characterological traits are produced and transmitted by his internal body chemistry. Which means, in practice, that a man is to be judged, not by his own character and actions, but by the characters and actions of a collective of ancestors."

that doesn't really make it sound like stereotyping a group of people would be racist. stereotypes exist because groups of people act similarly, in general. my family acts in quite a similar fashion. now, a stereotype usually seems to have a negative quality. but it is not really racist. i mean, there are intellectuals who are doctors in sociology. i'm sure everything they profess could be prefaced with the words 'in general.' in general this group of people act like this and in general this group of people acts like that. now, why the word 'group.' groups are characterized by being contained in a similar environment, i believe. this environment affects how people behave. unless one is to be shunned or ignored in these groups one will take part in some of the common activities like talking to others or watching particular entertainments together and then talking of those things. if one didn't what would one be able to talk about? not much. so one begins to display stereotypes common to the group. it's human nature.

growing as a culture.

changing ideals in white men in europe and early america and as a result one's being, one's desires and one's needs socially.

white women's lack of participation in art and philosophy in europe and early america and resulting decrease in association with white men.

differing desires to communicate and socialize with a group.

social characteristics of religions.

women's roles in differing societies and how they are regarded.

how well can one live outside of one's childhood culture, what can one learn, can one feel comfortable.

how does our melting pot deal with all the commotion. i think the formation of america necessitated the development of the internet. we need to exchange information quickly . globalization. globalization.globalization.globalization.

wow this is an amazing time in history. all nations are aware of each other. people are spreading. people aren't comfortable so we aren't complacent. differing cultures are becoming more integrated with each other. stereotypes are becoming less general. knowledge and tolerance increases. we've had things like politically correctness and save the animals and pay the workers more and the little guys are getting listened to more and oppression is being attacked in every way. i think we strive to better ourselves individually more than ever and more of us are doing it than ever because we are all allowed to and even expected to not like when a woman would be laughed at for trying to paint or a black man to speak his mind politically. we're competing with other nations. we are communicating together. all of this great stuff is facilitated by 'tools' like economy and internet and vacation. economy helps us strive for progress. what we can't do is allow fighting over the tools. the end goal isn't to be the most powerful nation china over usa or russia/france over england but to all work together. this will take a little time for our economies to get us there but if we avoid a devastating war we will end up there.

so what would be our goals if we were all working together. would it be spiritual or exploration or extreme proficiency or increases in all of them. or would we grow tired of the peace and the unstimulated challenges and enough people would make a go for power. yeah, that sure seems likely. but it's not heaven so...