6 ms·

If you think that country is US you are hilariously mistaken https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/most-ethnically-diverse-countries-in-the-world.html https://www

If you think that country is US you are hilariously mistaken https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/most-ethnically-diverse-countries-in-the-world.html https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/most-ethnically-diverse-... Africa and India are more diverse than US

denzil_correa 8y ago
Africa is a continent while India is a country. India is indeed much diverse than almost other countries.
- moorhosj 8y ago
  The World Atlas link shows 16 African countries more ethnically diverse than India.
  - denzil_correa 8y ago
    It's not surprising that a continent is more diverse than a country.
    - moorhosj 8y ago
      Sure, but that’s not what I, or the World Atlas, said. There are 16 individual African countries more diverse than India. 1 Guinea 2 Tanzania 3 Democratic Republic of Congo 4 Uganda 5 Liberia 6 Cameroon 7 Togo 8 South Africa 9 Congo 10 Madagascar 11 Gabon 12 Kenya 13 Ghana 14 Malawi 15 Guinea-Bissau 16 Somalia
iguy 8y ago
Well it's going to depend on your definitions. By American categories, India is 100% asian, and almost every sub-saharan country is 100% black. Of course local definitions vary. But that aside, GP has a point that contemporary American culture spends a lot of energy worrying about this. The energy expended is a poor measure of the size of the problem.
- moorhosj 8y ago
  ==By American categories, India is 100% asian, and almost every sub-saharan country is 100% black. Of course local definitions vary.== But the claim was about "ethnicities", not races. People frequently refer to their ethnicity as Irish, Sicilian, Catalan, etc. Rarely have I heard someone say their ethnicity is white. ==The energy expended is a poor measure of the size of the problem.== Who gets to be the judge of the size of the problem? If a certain race or ethnicity is spending a lot of energy on this, maybe it is incumbent on everyone else to re-assess the true size of the problem.
  - iguy 8y ago
    I'm not defending that the US is the "most ethnically diverse", I think that's far from true, but pointing out that this isn't an unambiguously defined question. I'm not sure I've never heard anyone state an ethnicity, but have heard the same people state belonging to multiple groups in different contexts. The dividing lines between what's an ethnicity and what's a race or a language group tend not to translate accurately between different places. Judging the extent of racial prejudice is also hard. But only crazy people think the US is more racist now than 100 years ago. 100 years ago the NYT did not devote many pages to white self-flagellation. Nor does China today. Nor does Liberia, for that matter.
    - moorhosj 8y ago
      Why would we compare the US today to the US 100 years ago? Should the Jim Crow-era really be our North Star? Categorizing it like this could be viewed minimizing today’s prejudice by comparing to prejudice of 100 years ago. I think the goal is to get to zero prejudice, so let’s compare against that. “Women don’t have it so bad today, 100 years ago they couldn’t even vote.”
      - iguy 8y ago
        I write pretty carefully, kindly try not to put words into my mouth. My reason for comparing real things, not utopias, is that we can learn things from them. Because they exist, or existed. And what you learn here is that the volume of argument about a bad thing is a poor indication of the prevalence of this bad thing. Quite possibly anti-correlated. Here's an easier example for you. The Guardian is full of articles of a feminist bent, decrying the wage gap, etc. Literally every day there are half a dozen. The Saudi newspapers are not like this. There are no snarky comments about the princes all being men of the same racial group. This difference in the volume of discourse does not indicate that women have it worse in London than in Riyadh. And observing this simple fact does not indicate approval of the situation in either country.
deogeo 8y ago
If I'm not mistaken, that study doesn't take into account how similar ethnic groups are. It would assign the same diversity index to a 50% Catalan, 50% Spanish country, as to a 50% Finnish, 50% Ugandan country.
- fastball 8y ago
  Precisely. Measuring purely the number of technically different ethnicities is a silly way of calculating diversity. You need to look at the delta between the ethnicities if you want to talk about diversity that isn't purely on paper. I probably should've just said "racially", but oh well.
  - tlarkworthy 8y ago
    Yeah probably US is most racially diverse
fastball 8y ago
Fair enough. I was thinking more in terms of the delta between the different ethnic groups, not in terms of the sheer number of technically different ethnicities.

denzil_correa 8y ago

Africa is a continent while India is a country. India is indeed much diverse than almost other countries.

moorhosj 8y ago
The World Atlas link shows 16 African countries more ethnically diverse than India.
- denzil_correa 8y ago
  It's not surprising that a continent is more diverse than a country.
  - moorhosj 8y ago
    Sure, but that’s not what I, or the World Atlas, said. There are 16 individual African countries more diverse than India. 1 Guinea 2 Tanzania 3 Democratic Republic of Congo 4 Uganda 5 Liberia 6 Cameroon 7 Togo 8 South Africa 9 Congo 10 Madagascar 11 Gabon 12 Kenya 13 Ghana 14 Malawi 15 Guinea-Bissau 16 Somalia

iguy 8y ago

Well it's going to depend on your definitions. By American categories, India is 100% asian, and almost every sub-saharan country is 100% black. Of course local definitions vary. But that aside, GP has a point that contemporary American culture spends a lot of energy worrying about this. The energy expended is a poor measure of the size of the problem.

moorhosj 8y ago
==By American categories, India is 100% asian, and almost every sub-saharan country is 100% black. Of course local definitions vary.== But the claim was about "ethnicities", not races. People frequently refer to their ethnicity as Irish, Sicilian, Catalan, etc. Rarely have I heard someone say their ethnicity is white. ==The energy expended is a poor measure of the size of the problem.== Who gets to be the judge of the size of the problem? If a certain race or ethnicity is spending a lot of energy on this, maybe it is incumbent on everyone else to re-assess the true size of the problem.
- iguy 8y ago
  I'm not defending that the US is the "most ethnically diverse", I think that's far from true, but pointing out that this isn't an unambiguously defined question. I'm not sure I've never heard anyone state an ethnicity, but have heard the same people state belonging to multiple groups in different contexts. The dividing lines between what's an ethnicity and what's a race or a language group tend not to translate accurately between different places. Judging the extent of racial prejudice is also hard. But only crazy people think the US is more racist now than 100 years ago. 100 years ago the NYT did not devote many pages to white self-flagellation. Nor does China today. Nor does Liberia, for that matter.
  - moorhosj 8y ago
    Why would we compare the US today to the US 100 years ago? Should the Jim Crow-era really be our North Star? Categorizing it like this could be viewed minimizing today’s prejudice by comparing to prejudice of 100 years ago. I think the goal is to get to zero prejudice, so let’s compare against that. “Women don’t have it so bad today, 100 years ago they couldn’t even vote.”
    - iguy 8y ago
      I write pretty carefully, kindly try not to put words into my mouth. My reason for comparing real things, not utopias, is that we can learn things from them. Because they exist, or existed. And what you learn here is that the volume of argument about a bad thing is a poor indication of the prevalence of this bad thing. Quite possibly anti-correlated. Here's an easier example for you. The Guardian is full of articles of a feminist bent, decrying the wage gap, etc. Literally every day there are half a dozen. The Saudi newspapers are not like this. There are no snarky comments about the princes all being men of the same racial group. This difference in the volume of discourse does not indicate that women have it worse in London than in Riyadh. And observing this simple fact does not indicate approval of the situation in either country.

deogeo 8y ago

If I'm not mistaken, that study doesn't take into account how similar ethnic groups are. It would assign the same diversity index to a 50% Catalan, 50% Spanish country, as to a 50% Finnish, 50% Ugandan country.

fastball 8y ago
Precisely. Measuring purely the number of technically different ethnicities is a silly way of calculating diversity. You need to look at the delta between the ethnicities if you want to talk about diversity that isn't purely on paper. I probably should've just said "racially", but oh well.
- tlarkworthy 8y ago
  Yeah probably US is most racially diverse

fastball 8y ago

Fair enough. I was thinking more in terms of the delta between the different ethnic groups, not in terms of the sheer number of technically different ethnicities.