"As I remember London": https://world.hey.com/dhh/as-i-remember-london-e7d38e64
In other words, it can be read more charitably as a lamentation about the loss / changing of a culture.
Then he goes on about 'Pakistani rape gangs' and 'abuse of British girls'–oh look, the classic trope of the nasty browns and blacks preying on our precious white children.
Then take this: 'There's absolutely nothing racist or xenophobic in saying that Denmark is primarily a country for the Danes, Britain primarily a united kingdom for the Brits, and Japan primarily a set of islands for the Japanese.'
These words would not be out of place in 1066 Britain ie 'this is a country of the Saxons, not the Normans'. Britain has seen this exact brand of xenophobia for millennia, in fact they even had periods of bigotry against Danes! If dhh had gone to London at the wrong point in history, he might have experienced racial prejudice.
Interesting, right?
It might just sound like something off TV Tropes to you, but even the Labor government's own inquiry [1] on the matter shows that hundreds if not thousands of children were actually molested by such gangs. It even has a chapter on "Denial", which brings your comment to another light:
> Instead, flawed data is used repeatedly to dismiss claims about ‘Asian grooming gangs’ as sensationalised, biased or untrue. This does a disservice to victims and indeed all law-abiding people in Asian communities.
For your reading:
[1] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/685559d05225e...
> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.