Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The US is a much more diverse population... Why is this always a fallback reference point? It is demonstrably false[0,1,2,3] and is continually regurgitated - as if the continued repetition would make it consequently true. There are countries in Europe that are far more diverse than the United States. Full stop. > But dealing with that chaos, at that scale, produces lessons and learning that won't happen anywhere e…
Just point at the data. The extra layer of attitude doesn't sell your argument, but just distracts from it. Sort the first table by rank US - 87 UK -109 France - 117 Germany - 148. When we talk about the West who else is anyone referring to? Denmark - 144. Norway - 146. My comment is in response to someone separating the US from the west, not US compared to the rest of the world. So don't be in such a hurry to react.…
I gave you the data, you did a cursory look over it, cherry-picked the data points you wanted, and then continued on with your belief that you are correct.
If you take offense to my frustrations at having heard this for the three-thousandth time, then I do apologise but this tired, old cliche is burning itself out faster than a B1 in a binary system.
>Sort the first table by rank US - 87 UK -109 France - 117 Germany - 148. When we talk about the West who else is anyone referring to? Denmark - 144. Norway - 146.
...and...
>The data shows the US is more diverse than other western countries.
From the exact same table that you referenced: Bosnia and Herzegovina - 41, Latvia - 61, Switzerland - 63, Belgium - 65, Estonia - 77, Moldova - 78, Spain - 82
Now back to:
>When we talk about the West who else is anyone referring to?
From a non-American exceptionalism perspective, when we mention the west we are generally speaking about the countries that make up the western world, not just the United States, yeah? ...or we can even go so far as to say countries that have been directly influenced by or have direct political affiliations with countries in the Western Hemisphere. ...or if you want to go Soviet-era, the west could just be any country that has any form of democracy.
>The data shows the US is more diverse than other western countries.
It does not, as the data I originally referenced proves. Even limited to just the Northern and Western Hemispheres, Canada and Mexico are far more diverse and have cities that are just as densely populated.
>My city has a population somewhere between Ireland and Norway but it's impossible to handle social issues the way those countries do or use them as models precisely because of the population density and diversity.
This makes no sense. They all have forms of representative democracies, county governments, city governments, etc. Why do you believe it's "easier" for these areas to handle social issues and that it comes down to the sole factor of diversity and/or population density...? Do you honestly believe that differences do not exist in the political spectrum in homogeneous areas? Are you not aware that there have been periods where countries didn't have official governments for this reason (e.g.: Ireland and Sweden)?