I think ultimately the problem here is the same problem we always face with fascism.

There is no middleground between believing your "race" (or your WHATEVER, religion, economic class, gender, it really doesn't matter) is supreme and being a good person, it is never innocuous or cute, or "just" engaging with history and celebrating it.

That doesn't mean you can't love your history or love history in general, but there is difference between that and believing that your history is part of something special that is outside the rest of the breadth of human experience.

Neoliberalism however, has flirted for decades with the idea that there can be a moderate, reasonable middle ground between believing your race is supreme and being a good person and that is the exact throne centrists have been clawing to occupy for longer than I have been alive.

That delusion ensured that this endpoint was all but inevitable.

To put it another way, the reason no one can succinctly define love is because while everybodies' experience of it is of course individual, it is also confoundingly the same even when we start from very different standpoints and love different things, when you untie the knot and examine the cord at the heart of it, it is the same love indisputably... which leads to the dizzying problem that love is always an expanding set that you have to keep adding new phenomena to as new individuals express it.

If you deny this, you begin down a very dangerous path, which is kind of the point that all great stories, religions, and ideologies attempt to get at in one way or another... and that path is none other than believing you are part of something special, a special race or group subject to a special love unlike the love others feel or receive...