https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-diversity-cr... > Putnam’s study, which used a large, nationally representative sample of nearly 30,000 Americans, found that people living in more diverse areas reported lower levels of trust in their neighbors. They also reported less interest in voting, volunteering, and giving to charity. In other words, greater diversity seemed to be linked to both feelings and behaviors that threaten a sense of community. The finding was alarming to many people, including Putnam himself, because the U.S. continues to grow in racial and ethnic diversity with each passing decade.

The authors hand wave his data by saying white people are to blame.

> In other words, greater distrust may stem from prejudice rather than from diversity per se. Therefore, Putnam’s conclusion that racial diversity leads to less altruism and cooperation amongst neighbors was incorrect. If there is a downside to diversity, it has less to do with the behavior of racial minorities and more to do with how Whites feel when living amongst non-Whites.

They attempt to decouple diversity and prejudice, but that is completely illogical. Their logic is if you asked a minority if they feel more comfortable with a jury that is made of people who are not of a similar culture and racial background as them they would, but white people wouldn’t. That is ridiculous.

>Past research has shown that Blacks and Hispanics, on average, report less trusting attitudes than do Whites. Without controlling for this, neighborhoods with more Blacks and Hispanics will appear to have lower “trust,” but for reasons having nothing to do with the degree of diversity.

The linked article has a lot of stuff about how the Putnam study misinterprets its data.

Sure, you can say the data is misinterpreted, but real world results also show the same conclusion and there is no evidence that shows multi racial areas that have programs that work as well as those in homogeneous societies. I linked it saying it refuted the data: yet it has nothing to prove the contrary. They interpreted it in a politically correct statement to blame white people and call them racist: but they don’t prove any opposite conclusions. They just hand wave it away by blaming white people. They have no respectable information. You asked about why they aren’t implemented in small towns that are homogeneous, what do you think happens in suburbs?

>what do you think happens in suburbs?

... HOAs enforce strict driveway maintenance codes? I don't think there are any suburbs with a national healthcare system or a social safety net.

You being snarky are you? Suburbs have much better pilot school programs and why would a suburb have a national healthcare system? Do you have an global warming prevention program for carbon credits in your backyard?

It might be that it is diversity of opinions that count here, and that there can be significant differences in opinions based on where you grew up etc.

So swedes are cool with this, but what about people from different backgrounds? As the GP hints, people working in Sweden who are not Swedish are not comfortable with this, so perhaps in countries with much more diversity these things would never get off of the ground due to the sheer number of competing opinions on what is acceptable/unacceptable etc

You hit the nail on the head; this is one of the many issues with diversity that is never discussed. Or rather, this is an example of how many people nowadays want superficial diversity (skin color, food, etc) but don't actually want diversity of opinions (thus we have political correctness, cancel culture, etc).