It may seem obvious - but then I've been accused of being a white supremacist and a black panther on the same piece. People read what they want to read and see the things they want to see. Medium readers seem fairly convinced I'm a man, that's on them - I don't mind one way or the other. My pronouns are they/them up there - not for any ideological reason, but just because that's how a lack of identity intersects with identity itself.

History is a clusterfuck of terrible people doing terrible things to each other. History is full of humans of all skin colours with a history of greed, destruction and aggression. It's very simplistic to say that White Spanish destroyed South America and White British destroyed India - first it plays into the 'noble savage' idea, that before there were white folks there was peace and harmony and everyone got on. Even a cursory reading of the Raj/Mughal set up before the Battle of Plassy suggests this is not the case. As for whether the Inca/Aztec populations were peace loving nomads, I'll let you do your own reading. Secondly, and perhaps somewhat stupidly, it negates to balance the scales. Should you have accepted a scholarship to Cambridge? Why diid you?

Nobody is calling people who talk sensibly about these things entitled or defensive. History and social context is important - NativeFriend simply glosses over the complexity with shorthand about how awful white people are. That's got her 11K followers in a few years, most of whom show up and do what you just did - not many of them will talk about whether Marx was right in his assertion that the British Empire was the natural successor to a stagnant India's lack of globalisation..... y'know, because White people suck. ;o)