The problem with using the 'anti-racists are da real racists' theory to explain this phenomenon, is that it relies on the Left having some kind of ulterior motive. Of course, there are indeed numerous ways in which the baizuo can be interpreted as racist.

For example:

• Non-Whites who don't align with them are in some sense 'mentally colonized', e.g. Biden's 'you aren't really black' comment, 'Uncle Tom' as an effective slur towards GOP-voting blacks, 'coconut', etc. This has the clear, paternalistic implication that the baizuo in some way 'own' or 'know the interests of' non-Whites, and that those who do not support them are in some way 'going against' their own interests. The baizuo thus assigns themselves the power to define for non-Whites what is or is not in their interests.

• All forms of 'positive discrimination' or 'reverse racism', e.g. 'blacks can dance, Whites can't dance', tend to go unquestioned (though I have also seen both non-Whites and baizuo oppose certain types of generalizations/stereotypes which benefit non-Whites).

• Status- and virtue- signalling: Adopting the stereotypical 'starving black kid', like those often shown on television advertisements often accompanied by sad music to illicit sympathy, to prove how 'un-racist' you are is something of an insincere reason to engage in 'anti-racist' actions, which arguably is 'racist' in itself, e.g. 'White saviour'.

• Jew/Muslim dichotomy: The more the Left sides with one, the more they anger the other (e.g. pro-Zionist Leftists must justify 'Islamophobia', pro-Muslim Leftists must justify 'anti-Semitism'). This was one of the problems that screwed up Jeremy Corbyn. Corbyn clearly took the Muslim side, Johnson clearly took the Jewish side. The latter side holds more power in the UK for now. There can be no 'anti-racist' position there simply because both sides are mutually exclusive.

• Deprivation of agency. The baizuo paint a world where Whites have immense agency (i.e. they wield a destructive power so immense that it has damaged non-Whites near or outright permanently) while non-Whites have practically no agency. Thus even if all Whites were extinct, there is no way that non-Whites can truly repair this damage even in a million years, which essentially paints them as weak, stupid, infantile, and as permanent victims, while painting Whites as almighty and powerful.

And now we have this new form that only became apparent with the Floyd/BLM thing - that positive representations of blacks are 'racist' while certain negative representations (e.g. crap artists) should remain. The long-term effect of such an idea is obviously that blacks will increasingly be associated with these surviving negative representations.

Sure, Leftists tend towards being more anti-White than they are pro-(insert non-White group/s here), which explains some of what otherwise seems like incoherence. But I think what is really happening is that the baizuo are losing control of the narrative within their own organizations, i.e. non-Whites are massively increasing in numbers/power within groups like the Democratic Party, and they're increasingly calling the shots while the baizuo are increasingly getting sidelined (let's face it, the Democratic Party is fast becoming the 'immigrant' or 'non-White' party). This demented incoherence probably comes from the overwhelmingly non-White 'progressive' politicians like AOC, Omar, etc. who are less competent than the baizuo and probably have no idea what they're really doing. The madness will increase because the party demographics are changing in a way that will increasingly favour these inept 'progressive' types. I don't think that the baizuo actually even have enough power over non-Whites (they did when there were less of them, and those there were less established within politics) to weaponize them against 'White America' or some other thing that they abhor.