The reason for this pluralism is that countries differ in how many % a parties must at least get to have any seats. Most countries impose an artificial limit, called election threshold. Netherlands does not.
Not everybody commit scientific fraud at the same rate. Let's look at some data. First retraction rates.
We can also look at the top list of most fraudulent researchers ever (so far those that were caught). Note: data from 2019 list. There's quite a few non-Europeans.
This is important because we want a per capita measure of sorts. For highly regarded journals, European built countries produced about 75% of science (Nature Index), but maybe 30% of top fraudsters.
You have maybe seen this plot. It shows ratings of races in USA by race. The key result is that each race favors their own, except for Whites who are apparently race-blind.
Since it only covered a single year, 2020, I wondered if this would replicate across years of data. So I downloaded the data for 1964-2024.
So we see that the result replicated (I didn't use survey weights). And indeed, in 2020 and 2024, Whites have about zero ethnocentrism.
But this pattern among Whites is more complex. Here are the ratings by political ideology (self-rated 1-7 scale). The below average attitude towards fellow Whites is concentrated on the left, just as @ZachG932 found before. Especially the far left.
Mental issues roughly follow a hierarchical pattern, like cognitive abilities, like a general factor on top. At least, statistically.
The motivating factors behind this approach compared to the categorical (diagnostic) approach are: 1) evidence of continuity between clusters, 2) binary encoding of continuous data loses information, 3) correlations among diagnoses are the norm, 4) a given person may not quality for any particular diagnosis, yet have severe symptoms.
Some aspects of mental problems haven't been integrated into the hierarchical model yet. Say, unusual sexual interests (from foot fetishes to pedophilia and rape fetishes).