It is much more applicable to countries with the first-past-the-post election system though, typically Great Britain and its former colonies. This is because that system tends to converge to very few, very large parties (really only two in the US), which then need to stay relatively close to each other so they can still compete for the "middle" voters. Stray too much and you will lose that middle group, so the big parties must stay relatively close together.

In countries where this system is not in place, you tend to get many more parties with a much wider spectrum of political ideologies. For example, in the Netherlands there is currently a party (with only 1 seat atm) in our equivalent to Congress that exclusively focuses on the interests of farmers (a group consisting of <2% of the labor force). Also while all parties have some opinion about immigration, there are also more single-issue parties both for and against the topic.

I'm not saying either system is better than the other (multiparty systems tend to have a much more difficult time forming governing coalitions than FPTP systems for example), but it is not an issue relevant to all countries.