The point is that knowing that Zurich is in Switzerland is more similar to knowing that Denver is in Colorado than it is to knowing that Denver is in the United States. Presumably the size of the city is interesting because the implicit assumption is that knowing where Zurich is important because Zurich is a big city.

My point is that it isn't similar at all, on any level.

A typical foreigner to the US probably knows where some large cities in US are without having the slightest clue about which state many of them reside in.

That is my perception of it.

...Which is why it's so similar to how a typical American probably knows where some large cities in Europe are without having the slightest clue about which country many of them reside in.

I'd say that few outside of America could write that sentence.

The difference between two neighbouring countries is a huge deal and apparent (regardless if you are a local or not) where you don't even speak the same language, have the same currency (the euro has of course changed that a bit (in Europe)) and for all practical purposes a complete different sets of laws and culture.

The reason for why many cities are notable is because they are the capitals of different countries. Their identity is based on their country. You can hardly say the same about different states in America (to the same extent (of course people that live in America have different accents and prejudices for people in other states etc., but to compare that to different countries?)).

I think we're both wrong to a certain extent - you're de-emphasizing the differences between states in America too much, and I'm overemphasizing them. You believe that countries are different enough culturally that not knowing which culture a city is part of is ridiculous, I believe that states are different enough geographically that not knowing which geographic area a city is equivalently ridiculous. It's a pretty dumb argument.

In America I don't need to travel at all to hear many different languages, experience different cultures, etc. They're all in walking distance in any major city. European mono-cultures need to make nationalistic distinctions, the American multi-culture doesn't.

America's monoculture was actually one of my surprises. I live in London; going to the Bay Area and seeing the monoculture was a bit of a shock. IMO you're far more likely to hear foreign languages (foreign to the country) in Europe than almost anywhere in the US.

SF is a bit white and hipster, like the northern half of the country. Try Los Angeles, there are few gringos here, and fewer all the time.

SF is far more Hispanic and East Asian than white. In any case, why so racist?

Don't confuse statement of fact with racism, a common misconception. I've traveled over the world and liked everyone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco#Demographics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Los_Angeles

"Try Los Angeles, there are few gringos here, and fewer all the time."

I was referring to this statement. And it is a racist statement. It is exactly as racist as saying "Try Illinois, there are few wetbacks there and fewer all the time." These are clear statements by the speaker that the group in question is both undesirable in general and worthwhile to eliminate or distance oneself from, a belief commonly called racism.

With regard to demographics, few of the thousands of undocumented immigrants likely respond to government questionnaires.

The trend is cleary described in the link above. The first sentence, "The 1990 United States Census and 2000 United States Census found that non-Hispanic whites were becoming a minority in Los Angeles."

> immigrants likely respond..

Exactly, they are quite underrepresented in the data above, reinforcing the argument. They are in higher concentration the farther south you go.

If you are upset with the word gringo or "fewer..", it was a small attempt at adding levity, perhaps it is a bit flippant.

Your assumptions of my mental state, however, are known psychologically as projection.

Perhaps you should ask yourself why you thought it would be funny, rather than psychoanalyze a stranger on the internet.

I'm sarcastic in general, and when receiving accusations respond. Of course we could always improve our writing in general. If you don't like your argument critiqued, perhaps you shouldn't do it either?

The San Francisco Bay Area? That's where I live. Mono-cultural it is not. Maybe you meant another Bay Area (there are as many of those as there are bays.)

I meant relatively speaking. In London, there are many streets that all could be in different countries, right down to the script used for the shop signs. I never once saw someone in a niqab or a djellaba, for example.

Well, I'm honestly bewildered. Where did you go in San Francisco? You didn't hear Spanish, Mandarin, or Cantonese anywhere? How? I hear these languages and more, constantly, every day.

London is one of the most diverse cities in the world. Relatively speaking, almost every city in the world is less diverse.

America is a baby compared to Europe, and modern communication works against localization of language.

There ate tens of cities in China with populations over several million that westerners have never heard of, too.

He's clearly American... :)

So, in other words, if it interests you, it's fair to quiz someone else about it, but if it doesn't interest you, it's not fair to quiz you about it.

Do you want me to quiz you on the provinces of Sweden?

Oh, you don't find that interesting? Well, hardly anyone outside Sweden probably does. Pointless knowledge.

To paraphrase Richard Feynman: you're not right; in fact, you're not even wrong.

No I don't find Swedish cities interesting. But I did not start quizzing you about U.S. cities. If you started quizzing me about Swedish cities, then it would be fair for me to quiz you about American ones. The issue of cities is irrelevant; the concept at discussion is "turnabout is fair play." The guy who asked about Zurich wanted to show how stupid Americans were by trumpeting his culturally specific, regionally biased knowledge. To show how this was just snobbery, an American did the same to him. It doesn't matter if you don't think America is interesting; that's not what this is about.

Note: I actually like Europe; I'm just trying to prove a point.

You guys might honestly think that it is easier to put a large US city in a state rather than pinpoint it on a map.

I don't think most foreigners would agree.

My interest in America isn't in any way related to my interest of the states within America...

"I don't think most foreigners would agree."

That is my point, in a nutshell: the knowledge is relative.

Most people could name a grand total of one city in all of Sweden. Just not on people's radars the way the US is.

I'm happy as long as we are not confused with Switzerland, but you missed my point.

Is the state that large US cities reside in on (foreign) peoples radars?

San Francisco and Los Angeles are in what US state?

Dallas?

Miami?

San Francisco and Los Angeles are in different states :) Just ask anyone...

> San Francisco and Los Angeles are in different states

Only San Franciscans think that. The folks in the rest of Northern CA know better.

The real dividing line in CA runs north/south. SF and LA are on the same side of that line.

Alta and Baja.