The whole point of "it's okay to be white" is that it's a trick statement. It's trying to reframe "non-white people should get a seat at the table" as an attack on white people.

The implication is that white people are losing something - and so they should take it back.

"Being white", in this set-up, doesn't mean eating cheese and reading Shakespeare. It means not having to worry about the "feelings" of non-white people, means not having to share privilege and power with non-white people.

It means "being white" in a society where they didn't have to worry about any of this stuff, because it was a white-dominated society.

Here's the rub. If you want to never have to actively share power with non-white people, if you want to live unconstrained by non-white ppl having social and cultural and political power, and you want the system to reflect that..

What do you call it, apart from white supremacy?

These are lines from the same playbook. They are the same words, designed to stoke the same resentments, towards the same ends.

It's not a coincidence.