That is not true, the phrase is non-native brits, and that is very different to what you wrote.
EDIT: removed unnecessary trailing inflammatory comment
-> Theres little complaint about the "white" Ausie bartender, BECAUSE he probably speaks great English, came there legally, isn't consuming wellfare resources, isn't advocating for Sharia law, and might even end up going back to Ausie land.
It's not about *skin color*, it is about culture/crime/wellfare resources and legal double standards.
If an Ausie entered the UK illegally, he would be deported. If an Ausie committed a crime, he goes to jail and/or deported. With these other people, they enter illegally but then get placed in tax payer funded hotels and politicians conspire with police to cover up their crimes (see the rape gang scandals) and they literaly arrested the victims.
At one point there were plenty of complaints when *too many Polish white dudes* rocked up in the UK and competed for jobs and didn't always speak good English.
Not about race - it is about Language, culture, job competition, crime rates, wellfare resources, values (sharia-law / treatment of women), social integration vs enclaves.
And only when it involves so many millions of people comming in that it rapidly alters the local culture. (or shifts votes! or whatever other thing people care about - overwhelming of infrastructure / housing availability)
Why is DHH a racist for sympathising with some Britts whom are unhappy with the 60% cultural transformation that is occuring in London?
You are reading between the lines to hastily conclude that DHH is a racist. You need more than just "he wasn't complaining about white Ausie bartenders".
Quote me an actual paragraph or sentence where DHH says he dislikes anyone because of their race ? Or stop calling people racists without hard proof. The tone of that DDH London article seems quite radical. But tone is not enough to indict.
It isn't my job to give you a point by point rebuttal of all the racist talking points you've regurgitated.