[Irenicus]

Wandering Knight:

Spoiler for because it's all off-topic:

while I agree that the rise of the USA was a far more complex affair than just "diversity is good," I think saying that America rose because it was opportunistic when the opportunity is good is also equally misleading. World War I did confirmed the USA's new position in the world stage for all to accept, while devastating Europe back quite a few years, but the USA was already an economic giant by the turn of the century, and it already started to pull its own weight around what's with the Spanish-Cuban-Filipino-American War and Teddy's Big Stick.

When we talk history long-term we often talk economics, and for the Americans their economy was easily competitive with other economic giants Great Britain and Germany (who, of course, turned their industries to war matters in the Great War, so it is involved), so in a way the rise was "inevitable." In this, however, diversity might play a role: the USA's diverse -- despite xenophobia from the dominant white Protestant group, and inter-racial conflicts among the minorities themselves -- society played a large if secondary role in bringing forth the masses of immigrants from Europe and elsewhere. Secondary because other, more important factors also exist, best summarized as the unprecedented worldwide population boom of the 19th century and the USA's own geographic advantages (big is good, no?) aside from the growing economy and a freer government and society that is attractive to immigrants.

And when I mean "inevitable" I don't literally mean inevitable, of course. Anything can happen, but the likelihood of the USA becoming a world power was near-certain by the start of the century bar some catastrophic events (say, an early Great Depression...the 1890's own depression hit the USA quite hard, IIRC; just read about the rise of the Populists). By all means the USA could have retarded -- your own Argentina is a failed attempt to become something akin to the Big Neighbor to the north, despite rapid economic growth in this very period, to no fault of the common people: I suppose dictatorships just aren't very compatible with laissez-faire booms.

Originally Posted by Reckoner

I did mention this, and no the diversity in population did help us. Where do you think we got all our labor to fuel our industrial revolution and railroads, etc?

Spoiler for same reason:

That isn't diversity so much as it is, well, population pulling weight, though.

It doesn't matter if it's Chinese immigrants or Civil War veterans who get to hold the hammer; if it's nailed, then it's nailed, and the pig irons will run.

Plus, America was quite xenophobic. The Irish, the Mormons, the Chinese, the Japanese, and of course the Mexicans*, among others, will attest to that. It was just a big enough place that xenophobia -- which is often synonymous with racism, despite being different concepts -- didn't ever have to express itself in mass killings and pogroms. That didn't stop the race riots, though.

*I'm not just talking about modern day either: the Californio's post-1848 should be able to tell you a few horror stories of their own...if any of them were living in present day, anyway.