| ▲ | wat10000 2 hours ago |
| I get hard working and low crime, but why does homogeneity make a country rich? |
|
| ▲ | kuerbel 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| It's not even true, 40% of the population has an immigrant background. And as for low crime, yes, blue collar crime. Please don't ask about white collar crime, we don't talk about that here... |
|
| ▲ | netsharc 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's a dog whistle for "if a country's racial identity remained pure everything would've been fine". |
| |
| ▲ | philipallstar 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It's nothing to do with race. You need to gain the mindset that not everything is about race. | | |
| ▲ | wat10000 40 minutes ago | parent [-] | | If it’s nothing to do with race, then why is a country with four official languages being called “homogeneous”? | | |
| ▲ | rayiner 32 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Why do people say China is “homogenous” when people speaking Cantonese can’t understand people speaking Mandarin? It’s because those groups of people have been part of a common polity off and on since the Qin dynasty more than 2,000 years ago. Similarly, Switzerland has been a thing, in various forms, since French and Italian were considered different dialects of vulgar Latin. The groups that speak the four different languages nonetheless share 800+ years of common political and social history. |
|
| |
| ▲ | wat10000 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It’s a bullhorn, not a dog whistle. I just hate this bullshit being stated as if it was a basic fact everyone agrees with. | | |
| ▲ | philipallstar 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | People talking about dog whistles constantly state that as if it's fact, instead of them just being race-brained. | |
| ▲ | WarmWash 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Because of Japan. A rigid culture and tradition can obviously carry a lot of weight, but usually comes with intense racism as well. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | bluebarbet 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Because it favors social cohesion and social trust, which are strongly correlated with economic success. Americans are reflexively thinking of race, but that's entirely incidental and basically irrelevant. |
| |
| ▲ | tpholland 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | But Switzerland emphatically does not have a homogenous population. It has an exceptionally diverse population, linguistically, religiously and culturally. And yet as you say it has an exceptional record when it comes to cohesion and social trust. Living the dream! | | |
| ▲ | rayiner an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | I’d point out two things: 1) While Switzerland combines several ethnicities and cultures, the fusion dates back almost a millennium. The Old Swiss Confederacy arose in the 14th century, before Italian, French, and Romansh were even recognized as separate languages. 2) The Swiss federal structure goes to great lengths to give autonomy to the distinct groups. So it’s not accurate to say that Switzerland is “homogenous” in the same way Denmark is homogenous. But it’s not like Switzerland’s Italian-speaking population grew from nearly 0% to the current 8% over a period of a few decades. There is a common umbrella identity encompassing these groups that dates back a long time. | | |
| ▲ | tpholland 12 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I quite agree. It's a diversity of peoples who have developed an umbrella identity that dates back a long time. And it's been very successful! They have a successful federal structure; much more so than more recent confederacies referred to by others in this thread (Belgium, Canada). |
| |
| ▲ | bluebarbet 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The social cohesion of Switzerland is mainly within the linguistic communities. Many Francophone Swiss hardly speak a word of German (just as their Belgian counterparts don't speak Dutch). And a large proportion of Switzerland's "diverse" immigrants are in fact from just across the country's borders (particularly Germans). "Diversity" is not what explains Switzerland's wealth. | | |
| ▲ | tpholland an hour ago | parent [-] | | Absolutely agree, and of course I would never argue that "diversity" explains Switzerland's wealth. It occupied a pretty unique and interesting place during the Reformation, and maybe there is something there. But the idea that either diversity or homogeneity can explain economic performance is obviously not bourne out by any serious examples. I was thinking about Belgium (and also thinking about Harry Lime) whilst typing away--it seems a bit of a counterexample to Switzerland where the same linguistic and cultural diversity within a country can lead to very different outcomes and senses. Nobody would ever write "Il n'y a pas de Suisse" as Destrée wrote "Il n'y a pas de Belges"--long history vs short history and as always the Reformation upheavals explain it perhaps |
| |
| ▲ | philipallstar 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Can you list the statistics that demonstrate the exceptionally diverse population? | | |
| ▲ | tpholland an hour ago | parent [-] | | Absolutely! Although I would have thought it was common knowledge. 62% of the Swiss population have German as their main language, 22.7% French, 8% Italian, and 0.5% Romansch. This is an extraordinary level of diversity for a European country, and as other commentators have noted it isn't like there's a lingua franca: a large proportion of Swiss do not speak the languages used by other groups fluently--for example, 85-87% of Swiss don't speak French at all! This should be quite straightforward evidence regardless of your cultural assumptions, but many people may not be aware of the impact and cultural importance of the Reformation in Europe, which in general meant that nations ended up with a state religion that was either Catholic or Protestant. Switzerland was pretty exceptional and in the 16th Century (which is the important period here) the population was split pretty much 50/50. This religious diversity is pretty important to its history as well as to wider European history. | | |
| ▲ | philipallstar 32 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I wouldn't call that extraordinary diversity - these are all Western European. I note you've added a new caveat "for a European country" as a get out of jail free card, but this "diversity" is extremely long-standing and, still, exists within Western Europe, the cradle of a hilariously disproportionate percentage of all of the social, civic, scientific, and technological advances the world has ever seen. | | |
| ▲ | tpholland a minute ago | parent [-] | | OK, you probably have a point. As they say, once you've seen the La Tène cultural package.... |
| |
| ▲ | bluebarbet an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Interesting statistics and I for one will back up your analysis. But the Alpine woolly mammoth in the room is that, in 21st-century Europe, "cultural and religious diversity" does not, for most people, imply a heterogeneity of Germanophones and Francophones, or Protestants and Catholics. It means something else. | | |
| ▲ | tpholland 36 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Sorry if cultural history and facts are a bit dull. I don't really want to argue about *something else* though; let's leave that to the *something else*ists. | |
| ▲ | wizzwizz4 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Can you say the quiet part out loud, please? I'm having trouble hearing what "something else" is meant to convey. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [deleted] |