Frame

Ryan Faulk of The Alternative Hypothesis has a good way to frame this issue:

1. All raceless or multiracial ideologies depend on groups behaving in ways they never have throughout history. Both in their specific temperaments (do you think the Chinese will take to small individualistic systems of thought?) and in how they get along with other dissimilar groups. If this can't be dealt with, deracinated worldviews aren't fit for purpose

2. Racial integration has a 100% failure rate. No harmony, no living together as people remain segregated, no equalizing of gaps. None of the policies have worked as they were sold.

Ethno-nationalism or Racial Collectivism is essentially a prison dilemma.
Which means: 1. the best possible accumulated outcome would be, if no one did it.
                          2. the best possible outcome for a group would be, if the group does it but its competitors dont.
                          3. the worst possible outcome for a group would be, if the group doesn't do it but its competitors do.
                          4. the expected outcome is, that all groups do it because no one wants to be the group with the worst outcome.

This means, that choosing ethno-nationalism is allways better than not to!

Only in a world in which there would be no in-group preferences from any side, not choosing ethno-nationalism would be beneficial. But such a world is an Utopia that will never exist!

People that oppose ethno-nationalism are therefore either too stupid to understand this simple logic, traitors to their own group or believe that the world would be an Utopia that couldn't even exist...