Originally Posted by professor
Caucasians and Asians seem to thrive in countries where only one culture exists. For example, Stockholm, tokyo, Seoul, Sydney, Singapore, Auckland, and Beijing. I suppose that when there is little to no diversity, there is more consensus due to similar upbringing. Many of the countries which house the aforementioned have the advantage of geography. They are separated from other countries by oceans, mountain ranges, or isolation due to vast nothingness between themselves and other countries. Strong enforcement of immigration laws have eliminated other cultures from disrupting their status quos and changing their cultures.
Singapore 29.3% foreign born. (And a whopping 87% come from an immigrant background)
Stockholm - 30.1% foreign born
Auckland 39.1% foreign born
Sydney - 40.1% foreign born
Beijing - only 5% foreign born/ non Han Chinese - but 35% speak another language (read: migrants from across the 'empire', speaking one of the 300 languages in China). China btw, with 56 official minorities and 180 unofficial ones has a similar diversity index to the US.
The only two cities where they are mono-cultural are from the two countries that buck the trend of high diversity in Asia - Japan and South Korea, which are two of the most homogenous countries in the world.