Because if it makes them feel bad in any way it's hate and bigotry. If it makes them feel good it is not.

There is nothing illogical about this: we are their biological rivals and they hate us and want us dead.

Yeah, I'd like to know, why is it bigoted to say "Kenya was never great"? I suppose it depends whether you know anything about Kenya or not. If you are knowledgeable about what's going on in Kenya, you could make such a statement and it might have some meaning. You might truly believe that Kenya is not so great and have good reasons for saying that. But if you are ignorant of what's going on in Kenya, which, I have to surmise, is the most common situation and you make such a statement, then, yes, your comment is bigoted. I live in America and I know something about what's going on here. So, I'm entitled to say that America is not so great if I find things that need improvement. But I know nothing about Kenya or very little. So, for me to make such a statement about Kenya would be bigoted.

because countries like Kenya and Nepal are not "White European" countries. Haven't you heard? White is evil and must be destroyed. Black and Brown are intrinsically good - but only if they adhere to a Socialist/Communist narrative.
Educated/well informed White Westerners are really the only thing standing in the way of the Globalist communist narrative becoming reality. Hence everything perceived as White culture especially USA must be destroyed by whatever mans available and necessary.

You sound like Bill Buckley in 1957!

From [theintercept.com]:
"“The South does not want to deprive the Negro of a vote for the sake of depriving him of the vote,” he goes on. “In some parts of the South, the White community merely intends to prevail — that is all. It means to prevail on any issue on which there is corporate disagreement between Negro and White. The White community will take whatever measures are necessary to make certain that it has its way.”

Buckley goes on to weigh whether such a position is kosher from a sophisticated, conservative perspective. “The central question that emerges,” he writes, “is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically?” His answer is clear:

The sobering answer is Yes — the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race. It is not easy, and it is unpleasant, to adduce statistics evidencing the median cultural superiority of White over Negro: but it is a fact that obtrudes, one that cannot be hidden by ever-so-busy egalitarians and anthropologists. The question, as far as the White community is concerned, is whether the claims of civilization supersede those of universal suffrage. The British believe they do, and acted accordingly, in Kenya, where the choice was dramatically one between civilization and barbarism, and elsewhere; the South, where the conflict is by no means dramatic, as in Kenya, nevertheless perceives important qualitative differences between its culture and the Negroes’, and intends to assert its own. NATIONAL REVIEW believes that the South’s premises are correct. If the majority wills what is socially atavistic, then to thwart the majority may be, though undemocratic, enlightened. It is more important for any community, anywhere in the world, to affirm and live by civilized standards, than to bow to the demands of the numerical majority."

All lives matter= intolerance, yet they trend all countries matter on 4 th of July. Hypocrites that’s all