All kinds of societies are biologically legitimate. Yet not all are equally desirable as systems in which an observer human being may wish to live. The capacity that man has as a language-centered social being of becoming an observer, and thus of operating as if he were external to the situation in which he finds himself, allows him, if he has the proper experiences, to contemplate the societies that he integrates and to like or dislike them. If the observer human being defines a metadomain from the perspective of which some of the defining relations of the society are undesirable, he dislikes it, and if he acts accordingly he becomes antisocial and may come to validate another society with his conduct. A totalitarian society restricts this possibility either by specifying the experiences that its components may have, so that they do not operate as observers, or by uncoupling the dissidents so that they may not seduce others to be observers as themselves. However, there are certain experiences that cannot be fully specified in a human society without destroying the basically individual structural plasticity needed for the establishment of consensual domains and the generation of language and, hence, for human creativity in general.

— Maturana and Varela, 1972, Boston Studies In The Philosophy Of Science, vol 42

Whites don't like totalitarian societies because whites are generally quite socially, linguistically and materially creative when not actively being Harrison Bergeron'ed by totalitarians. When totalitarians come into a society and want to take it over, to steal it, they see whites as an impedance to their plans, because their plans require obedience, not creativity.