 A much greater concern arises when it is clear that a figure embraced objectionable views, acted upon them and included them as elements of their philosophy. Curry and others have shown that Royce did embrace several problematic positions. Royce was indeed ahead of many others in rejecting biological or “scientific” racism, and with it the view that ostensible “racial characteristics” are fixed or essential. He instead embraced a form of cultural racism in which white civilization, and especially Anglo-American civilization,[4] was considered superior to Black, Asian, and other racial/cultural societies. Accordingly, Royce assumed that the ideal “beloved community” would emerge from the Anglo-American culture of the late 19th century, and would develop in a way that reflects Anglo-American principles, values, and institutions. Royce maintained that racial characteristics arise from environment and culture; under different influences, then, different characteristics will develop. This assumption led Royce to regard British colonialism as a “civilizing” force rather than an oppressive one, and to advocate for a similar imposition of civilizing administrative measures in the American south. It led him to assume that foreigners and non-white people ought to be assimilated into Anglo-American communities; he did not entertain the possibility that they might develop genuine communities built on their own history and culture. Finally, it led him to advocate for a “wise provincialism” in which different communities reflect the distinctive culture and history of their members. Such a model does acknowledge the importance of diversity and pluralism, but Royce seems to have thought that this diversity would be constrained within the core Anglo-American values and institutions to which everyone had already been assimilated. This limited provincial diversity thus apparently arose not from respect for the value of different cultures, but from a need to maintain order by not appearing intolerably oppressive (Curry 2018, 27).