Once these disparate parts were held together by a common enemy, by the fault lines of world wars and the electrified fence of communism. With the end of the cold war there was the creeping concern that without a focus for hatred and distrust, a sense of national identity would evaporate, that the left side of the hyphen – African-American, Mexican-American, Irish-American – would overwhelm the right. And slow-growing domestic traumas like economic unrest and increasing crime seemed more likely to emphasize division than community. Today the citizens of the United States have come together once more because of armed conflict and enemy attack. Terrorism has led to devastation – and unity. –"A Quilt of a Country,” Anna Quindlen Yet even in 1994, the overwhelming majority of those surveyed by the National Opinion Research Center agreed with this statement: "The U. S. is a unique country that stands for something special in the world." One of the things that it stands for is this vexing notion that a great nation can consist entirely of refugees from other nations, that people of different, even warring religions and cultures can live, if not side by side, [then] on either side of the country's Chester Avenues. Faced with this diversity there is little point in trying to isolate anything remotely resembling a national character, but there are two strains of behavior that, however tenuously, abet the concept of unity. –"A Quilt of a Country,” Anna Quindlen Which statement best traces the development of a central idea from one paragraph to the next? The first paragraph discusses what unifies Americans; the second describes America’s uniqueness among nations. The first paragraph discusses America’s diversity; the second gives examples. The first paragraph discusses conflict in America; the second discusses solutions. The first paragraph discusses America’s diversity; the second discusses the wealth of recent immigrants.