I feel like this bears repeating: diversity can be a positive goal. Representation can be a good thing. Games being made by diverse groups of people, FOR diverse groups of people and for different audiences, can be a good thing. Righting historical wrongs and breaking down systemic barriers can be a good thing.
You don't need to attack other groups of people to do those things.
When I look at these Sweet Baby people, or someone like Alyssa Mercante, I don't see people who are doing the former. I see people who are doing the latter. This lady isn't talking about empowering people; she just wants to attack people she dislikes. Likewise, the hill that Alyssa Mercante seems intent on dying on isn't that she's fighting to make things better for anyone. She repeatedly and decisively keeps coming back to "I want to be able to shit on white people and not be called racist." Then some weird mental gymnastics happen, where they conflate the two. "White people are the reason things suck for minorities, so therefore attacking white people/straight people/cis people/men IS THE SAME as helping minorities."
But they're not the same, and things aren't that simple. I'd argue that attacking people on the basis of their immutable characteristics is bad, period. And it's not just bad *for the people being attacked*. It's bad for the people doing the attacking. It promotes lazy thinking, and a hateful outlook, and it strips power from the attackers because it convinces them that they don't have the means to solve their own problems. It also fundamentally misunderstands how human psychology works. Attacking a large group of people is going to result in backlash, period. You can blame said backlash on "white fragility" or "the patriarchy" or whatever all you want, but the much more obvious truth is that people just don't like being antagonized or insulted. They're going to get mad, and they're going to be much less likely to want to help you.
These people are hateful, racist, sexist, and ignorant. They're everything they claim to hate.