3 ms·

I question your methodology, but let's take it at face value. >In fact, if you look at the accompanying map[2], you will immediately notice a strong inverse co

I question your methodology, but let's take it at face value. >In fact, if you look at the accompanying map[2], you will immediately notice a strong inverse correlation between diversity and living standard. Assuming the underlying analysis of diversity level is accurate, this map itself is a condemnation of the entire ideology surrounding diversity. As a matter of fact, this correlation is much weaker than you portray it to be, and the number of outliers in this hypothesis call it deeply into question. Let's assume GDP (factoring in purchasing power parity) per capita as a proxy for standard of living. Consult this map and compare it to yours: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita_in_2023.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_countries_by_GDP_(... You see many counter-examples to your thesis. Africa tends to have poor correlation between ethnic diversity and standard of living. Look also at East Asia: the more diverse Indonesia and Papua New Guinea are doing better economically than their homogeneous northern neighbor in the Philippines, in this region too is diversity poorly correlated with economic status. Also true of Europe -- just look around the map and you'll find counterexamples everywhere. Look at Switzerland -- it's at once one of the wealthiest and most diverse European countries according to your map. Your example of Japan as an ethnostate is also an interesting case study. I agree that it resembles an ethnostate. However, it's also going through a demographic crisis which is in large part attributable to its status as an ethnostate: an increasingly wealthy and aging ethnically Japanese population is an impending disaster in the face of Japan's historical (and contemporary) strict policies on immigration and integration. Speaking of demographic crisis, compare your map to this one: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/2017_world_map%2C_median_age_by_country.svg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/2017_wor... I see some correlations there.

p-e-w 3y ago
The standard metric to compare to would probably be the Human Development Index[1]. Which paints roughly, but not quite, the same picture as GDP. But regardless of which development metric you choose, I'm sure you agree that the (inverse) correlation between development and diversity is obvious. Calculating the Spearman coefficient for the two datasets would be an interesting exercise, which I regret I don't have time for at the moment. This leaves four possibilities: 1. High development reduces diversity (very unlikely). 2. High diversity impairs development. 3. High diversity and low development have a common underlying cause. 4. The correlation is coincidental. Even in Africa, the correlation is apparent. The countries bordering the Mediterranean all have low diversity and high development, compared to almost all other African countries. [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Countries_by_Human_Development_Index_(2021).svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Countries_by_Human_D...
- drewdevault 3y ago
  >Even in Africa, the correlation is apparent. The countries bordering the Mediterranean all have low diversity and high development, compared to almost all other African countries. Okay, let's examine this assumption, comparing your first map (diversity) with the map you reference in this comment (HDI). First, Africa: Consider southern Africa. South Africa is the most ethnically diverse country in this region; it also has the highest HDI. The two more homogeneous countries north of it, Botswana and Zimbabwe, are not outliers in their neighborhood when it comes to the HDI score. Let's look to Western Africa: along the Ivory Coast we see a number of relatively high-diversity countries, but their diversity scores relative to each other are not well-correlated with their HDI scores. In the Arab World, Northern Africa through to the Middle East, we also see poor correlation between diversity and HDI: Algeria, Libya, and Egypt are relatively wealthy and homogeneous, but Saudi Arabia is wealthier than any of them and has higher diversity; Yemen is both one of the poorest countries and most homogeneous in the region. In Middle Asia, compare China to Kazakhstan: both are high HDI (Kazakhstan scores higher), but China is more homogeneous and Kazakhstan is more diverse. In the Mediterranean, the correlation is somewhat stronger but still has numerous counterpoints; Bosnia and Herzegovina is the most diverse country in the region but it's HDI scores comparably to its neighbors to the south and east. And, again, moving slightly north, Switzerland is the highest scoring country on the HDI in Europe and is also among the most diverse. Your methodology is very weak and your conclusions make no sense.
- ComposedPattern 3y ago
  [dead]

p-e-w 3y ago

The standard metric to compare to would probably be the Human Development Index[1]. Which paints roughly, but not quite, the same picture as GDP. But regardless of which development metric you choose, I'm sure you agree that the (inverse) correlation between development and diversity is obvious. Calculating the Spearman coefficient for the two datasets would be an interesting exercise, which I regret I don't have time for at the moment. This leaves four possibilities: 1. High development reduces diversity (very unlikely). 2. High diversity impairs development. 3. High diversity and low development have a common underlying cause. 4. The correlation is coincidental. Even in Africa, the correlation is apparent. The countries bordering the Mediterranean all have low diversity and high development, compared to almost all other African countries. [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Countries_by_Human_Development_Index_(2021).svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Countries_by_Human_D...

drewdevault 3y ago
>Even in Africa, the correlation is apparent. The countries bordering the Mediterranean all have low diversity and high development, compared to almost all other African countries. Okay, let's examine this assumption, comparing your first map (diversity) with the map you reference in this comment (HDI). First, Africa: Consider southern Africa. South Africa is the most ethnically diverse country in this region; it also has the highest HDI. The two more homogeneous countries north of it, Botswana and Zimbabwe, are not outliers in their neighborhood when it comes to the HDI score. Let's look to Western Africa: along the Ivory Coast we see a number of relatively high-diversity countries, but their diversity scores relative to each other are not well-correlated with their HDI scores. In the Arab World, Northern Africa through to the Middle East, we also see poor correlation between diversity and HDI: Algeria, Libya, and Egypt are relatively wealthy and homogeneous, but Saudi Arabia is wealthier than any of them and has higher diversity; Yemen is both one of the poorest countries and most homogeneous in the region. In Middle Asia, compare China to Kazakhstan: both are high HDI (Kazakhstan scores higher), but China is more homogeneous and Kazakhstan is more diverse. In the Mediterranean, the correlation is somewhat stronger but still has numerous counterpoints; Bosnia and Herzegovina is the most diverse country in the region but it's HDI scores comparably to its neighbors to the south and east. And, again, moving slightly north, Switzerland is the highest scoring country on the HDI in Europe and is also among the most diverse. Your methodology is very weak and your conclusions make no sense.
ComposedPattern 3y ago
[dead]