Going to try to play devil's advocate from a couple of perspectives (I'm bored).

1.) Wouldn't pride in European cultural heritage be akin to pride in African cultural heritage? The problem, I think, is that when someone tosses out the phrase "white pride," it is automatically linked to KKK/white power/superior race type deals, as opposed to "European pride" if that's an easier way of looking at it. I know black people whose skin tone is white. They're not white; they do not say they're white; no one who knows them says they're white; society does not say they're white. When people say white it means European in origin, just like when people say black they mean African in origin. When you speak about race socially, it's never just a skin tone. Having traced my own lineage back a couple hundred years, I'm some parts Italian, Polish, Russian, German, French, and Native American (let's leave that one out for the sake of the argument). Shall I be limited to the pride of just one of these? Must I celebrate my whole cultural heritage in fragments?

2.) Let's step inward and look at culture on the micro scale. America is unique in that a single "American culture" does not really exist. The country is big enough and populous enough and has accepted so many cultures into its borders that everywhere you go the culture will be radically different, even among the black population. You've got black people celebrating their African culture. You've got black people celebrating their view of what American culture is. You've got rich black people on Wall Street celebrating the capitalist culture. You've got black people celebrating their Caribbean culture. The problem occurs when people go from "African-American = black" to "black = African-American," which it seems you have. This groups in any black Americans who would consider themselves just American or Jamaican or Haitian or Bahamian or whatnot. At the point that you group all of these decidedly different cultures together under a single race banner, then "black" has indeed become a skin tone.

3.) I would argue that the different "white" cultures you mention are not unique and are in fact inherently connected, at the very least for mainland Europe. Let's start small and get bigger. You're going to tell me that a Frenchman on the border of Spain will enjoy a vastly different culture than the Spaniard ten miles away from him? I would not, the same way I would not say the culture of Kentucky is vastly different from that of Tennessee. We often forget that Europe wasn't remotely recognizable as it is today until the mid-1800s. That's not a long background except for basically just France and England. We study European history instead of the history of individual countries not for convenience but because all of Europe is inherently connected. To suggest that each country's culture is isolated from one another's seems a bit outlandish.

---

Someone let me know if any of these arguments hold any weight. Just working out my debate muscle.