as constructs based on prejudicial views, with very few samples taken, and every evidence to the contrary ignored are not very useful. But some generalizations, heuristics, or rules of thumb must be used, or we aren't able to function as social beings at all, because we won't be able to make any predictions. Perhaps I wasn't going into this with sufficient detail to make it clear, so here is an example: taking walks in Paris France I've noticed quite a few Paris inhabitants have a tendency to bump into you, whereas in Stockholm where I live, people tend to move slightly to avoid contact. Here is my rule of thumb: since people collisions bother me, when in Paris, I will take extra care when meeting people on the street so I won't have to bump into them, in case it is a Paris native who doesn't seem to care. Needless to say this is a generalization, if tested scientifically, perhaps only 67 out of a hundred exhibit this "personal space problem behaviour". But to me this is still a useful heuristic.

As far as the foreign policy issue goes, I agree completely, there are no simple answers. I was just asked what I think is the problem with double standards visavi americans, one of my responses was that many americans seem to hold the view that the US is a just nation above reproof- which we both agree is not true and not possible, for any nation- but it was the view seemingly held by so many I was challenging.