Oppressing whites is supposedly necessary for the equality cause.
But how much equality motivation is true?
Multiculturalists show almost no concern for inequalities that harm any non-ally individuals. Every racial and religious minority in majority Muslim countries could be quietly exterminated over the next 40 years and multiculturalists would do little more than slightly wring their hands. Rulers bomb Muslim countries on behalf of globalism, neoconservatism, and war profiteering, not to protect non-Muslim minorities.
Blacks are dozens of times more likely to commit stranger on stranger interracial violent crimes than whites, yet the national media show almost no concern for these victims, even when blacks are heard to be shouting slurs while committing crimes, no matter the color of the victims.
But when a black dies under suspicious circumstances at the hands of a white stranger, the national media goes into full anti-white demonization mode, even when the evidence suggests legitimate self defense. And even when the alleged perpetrator isn't white.
Multiculturalists have no explanation for how their brethren--whipped into long-lasting frenzies of hate, sadism, and schadenfreude--will suddenly turn into just rulers. Multiculturalists spend little time weighing evidence and studying actual policy issues.
Few multiculturalists are aware that age, IQ, educational level, educational field, task persistence, spending habits, number of working adults in a family, and other factors more than completely explain differences in wealth between Northern Eurasian and black families. Some multiculturalists demand reparations for slavery as if they were completely unaware that de facto affirmative action and various welfare programs already cost the US economy well over $1.1 trillion dollars per year. Affirmative action even exists for groups wealthier than whites.
Even comparatively well-meaning multiculturalists seem oblivious of the overwhelming ethical evidence against multiculturalism. Paul Krugman regularly rants against economic conservatives who ignore well-reasoned economic evidence, yet Krugman is worse on biocultural issues than establishment Republicans are on economic issues. The only time I can remember Krugman being slightly right on an ethnoracial issue was when he slightly criticized Stephen Jay Gould's arguments. (It is no accident that Krugman, rephrasing Barry Goldwater, calls his blog "Conscience of a Liberal." Conscience refers to intuitions. The message: Multicultural intuitions matter more to Krugman than ethical evidence.)
None of the Grey Lady's pro-multicultural arguments are well-reasoned. Demands for compassion are rampant, even as the New York Times shows little compassion for the massive harms nonwealthy whites suffer from multiculturalism. The attitude among multiculturalists seems to be my team is automatically right and superior regardless of the evidence.
The end stages of neo-Marxism resemble Zimbabwe, Venezuela, North Korea, and South Africa, never universal equality or even semi-universal equality. Even in societies of unmitigated totalitarianism, the hunt for alleged reactionary forces is considered more important than actual equality. Dysgenics marches on.
Various slogans make multiculturalists superior, but goodness seldom exists. Harmful actions help the team, and the team is what matters most to them. And if multiculturalism wins complete victory the team will become even more factious than now, with Muslims and blacks wiping out other supporters of multiculturalism, just as various secular supporters of neo-Marxism were previously wiped out in North Africa and Southwest Asia by serious Muslims and just as white supporters of neo-Marxism in Zimbabwe fled or were murdered by blacks.
But if multiculturalism wins complete victory, there will be no white areas left for white multiculturalists to flee toward.