Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Context is a concept The Economist apparently fails to pursue with anything they touch - see the Hirsi Ali comment. The only reason I posted this graph is to point out that the figure in the Economist gives the idea to those who don't study the figure in depth that more Muslims are within the USA than European countries - and look, the USA has no troubles at all! It must all be Europe's faulty social model if they can't even handle their miserable amounts of Muslims...

If the Economist can pile all numbers onto one heap, so can I. It just goes to show that with a larger Muslim society, Europe is in a different stage of integration than the USA is - that's all. It makes no sense to draw parallels based only on the amount of total Muslims present. Comparing between two continents when the USA has a percentage of total population that's as large as France, or the Netherlands, that'd make a first start.

Now the Economist included the percentages as well within their figure, but why the choice to present it the way they have it, and not the way I put up? What's the motivation behind that choice? I'm not a statistical expert, so everyone should feel free to point out where my reasoning is flawed.

by Nomad on Sun Jun 25th, 2006 at 07:57:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Top Diaries

Occasional Series