The actual non-racist response is to be indifferent.  If all races are equal, and equally valuable, then a reduction in the percentage of whites is something to be neither celebrated nor pitied.

And indeed, we have many loyal, hard-working citizens of many races in this country.

But I’m coming around to the idea of contradictions in ideology.  

The language required for the diversity arguments implicitly accepts some of the frame premises of the White Nationalists, but refuses to engage with them.

1. It accepts the idea that cultures are tied to, rather than independent of, race.  If blues and oranges are identical culturally, and society is operating correctly, then adding an orange to a blue team won’t actually improve performance relative to another blue.  

If society isn’t operating correctly and oranges are being wrongly discriminated against, then as this is corrected it reverts to the state above, and the less discrimination there is, the less valuable diversity is.

And if it’s true independent of cultural membership?  Well then you’re saying race materially matters, which is worse.

2. It accepts the idea that cultures are different.  If cultures aren’t different there is literally no reason for diversity.  Now, one can suggest that all cultures are different, but that they’re all exactly equally valuable, but really, what’s the probability of that?

And it isn’t even believed by its advocates, who are reduced to arguing that cultural practices aren’t cultural, even as they attempt to change cultural practices.  Practices such as FGM are cultural.  If you think that a culture with FGM, and the exact same culture but without FGM, aren’t equal, then you already think some cultures are better than others!  So if you try to ban or remove FGM, you’re making a judgment on cultures.  You didn’t escape making it - at best, you moved it back one level to ‘rights’, but the acceptance of rights as a moral ideal is itself cultural.

3. There is no final metric for the optimal level of diversity.  Is it 1/N, where N is the number of ethnic groups in a country?  That’s obviously not feasible since ethnic groups can be divided discretely until reaching the level of the individual. 

Is it representative of the population’s current demographics?  Clearly not, based on the behavior of diversity advocates, where the more underrepresented group members something has, the more praiseworthy it is.  Part of the problem is that there are only so many of a group to go around, so if they’re in one software company, for instance, they can’t be in another.  And then we start getting critiques about how birdwatching is racist and similar issues, but if they were made or incentivized to engage in birdwatching, that would be considered cultural imperialism or erasure.

4. Forced to argue that religion has no effect on behavior, while simultaneously fighting the religious for control over government social policy.

Having implicitly accepted that race matters, culture matters, no metric for optimal diversity is set (so it has no upper limit), and fighting culture wars while claiming not to fight culture wars, the stage is set for WNs and other ethnonationalists.

The WN looks at a post like the one above and decides that diversity advocates are essentially similar to a rival variety of ethnonationalist, and at best just as arbitrary.  So he might as well fight for his group at the expense of the others, since the others will do the same at his expense.