> University-educated professionals in country X very often have rather different attitudes from poor villagers in country X, so whether your immigrants from country X are mostly university-educated professionals vs mostly poor villagers may be much more significant than the mere fact that you are accepting immigrants from that country

I don’t think that makes much of a difference. I’m part of the south Asian diaspora immigration to America—that community carries with it culture and attitudes from back home as much if not more so than any villagers. In particular attitudes towards government, social hierarchy, child rearing, social obligations to others, etc.

Which country you’re talking about also makes a difference. America, in particular, was mostly founded by the poorest immigrants from Europe. The Germans, Italians, and Irish came here from the absolute bottom of the ladder. In my observation, poor immigrants from Latin America are a better cultural fit than university educated Indians or Chinese.

Also, refugees (as in Europe) versus voluntary immigrants (as in Australia and Canada) makes a big difference. If you poll people in Asia and the Middle East, only single digit percentages of people say they would leave their home country if they had the opportunity if they had the chance. So the people who undertake voluntary immigration are a self-selecting group of especially anti-social people. My parents left Bangladesh because they don’t like Bangladeshis. This is not an uncommon background for those Asians whose kids end up inter-marrying.

And finally, Indians are a bit of a special case. Remember India (and Bangladeshi be Pakistan) was a British colony for hundreds of years. My mom grew up with English, reading the canons of western literature, etc.