Hi again, haha. Sorry if this is a bit spammy but I thought I'd try responding a bit to one aspect of your origional article.

You do cover a lot of ground, so I think I'll just answer the first point (at least at the moment) so as not to reply with a thesis, haha.

I think a lot of what you’re mad at with your first point in particular would be people who are culturally very liberal without having proper leftie ideas to go with it, though that's just my initial thought (ie people who want to challenge individual bias and maybe shove some women into a position of power but not actually address the systemic problems and reasons why people from these groups are less likely to succeed). When you say "...yet has done nothing to help them economically..." this does heavily suggest to me that this is the case.

You correctly identify that it’s difficult to get people (ie, white men) to give up power. Some people definitely do try to do the whole “shame” thing, and I and I reckon a lot of lefties think that it’s extremely cringe.

I’d say it’s primarily about acknowledging the systemic discrimination and disadvantages that minority groups face, and hopefully trying to advocate for addressing the problems in these systems so that they can be perpetuated less (eg, things like ending the drug war, and investing in poorer communities, making sure people have access to decent education, opportunities, etc) as well as addressing biases and misconceptions that individuals might have.

None of that is easy, but at the end of the day, if a white guy were to believe that people of other races, genders, etc, weren’t inherently less valuable, capable, deserving of living a decent life, etc, and they were to be aware of why minorities are systemically disadvantaged, they would also need to come to the conclusion that it’s probably good to challenge and stop perpetuating the oppression of these groups in society, and that seeing fewer people who look like them in positions in power isn’t some moral corruption, but rather the inherent result of there being less oppression or barriers preventing anyone who didn’t look like them from succeeding.

I also think it's awesome to be proud of your heritage. Equally, I think some of the problem can come when people aren't critical of what they're celebrating. For example, I'm sure there are things you could celebrate the US but if you're not also conscious of how engrained racism was to its history, this comes off as very insensitive, etc. When people act like white men people built America and ignore the institutions of slavery... you can see how this can easily spiral. A lot of ideas around what "white" heritage one should be proud of history in America seems to end up being US history but pretending that black people didn't also exist. Being aware of that sort of thing and not erasing minorities from US culture doesn't mean that white people have no heritage worth celebrating at all, even if it sometimes feels like *or is the case that) people are saying that. So, I guess it just depends.

This is my general understanding, and I hope that makes sense!