If you see any difference between those two, I suggest you read mistermann's comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23301679 and think about it really hard. If you are willing to confront your bias, that is.
One of them was a reaction to a well-evidenced trend of excessive police force against black people. The other one is literally a neo-nazi dog whistle intended to promote the theory that there is a conspiracy against white people in western society and draw well meaning white people into nazi ideology. I'm not biased on this point, I simply know the facts. I suggest you read the ADL's coverage of it, and similarly "think really hard". https://www.adl.org/blog/from-4chan-another-trolling-campaig...
There is a conspiracy against white people in Western society.
On social media, no one would bat an eye at the quote "white people are trash". The quote "black people are trash" is (correctly) an instant ban. If Sarah Jeong wrote that she "loved being cruel to old brown people", she would not be working for the NYT. Take any socially accepted joke about white people, and replace white with any other race to make it no longer socially acceptable.
There is a different standard applied to white people than other races. That's an objective fact.
You can argue that this is justified due to differences in societal power, which is not an unreasonable argument at all, but to deny that it exists is willful ignorance.
The reason that "it is okay to be white" is so effective is that it does have poignancy to young, impressionable white people who inhabit an online world filled with vitriol directed at them, so when you then call it a "racist" statement, it only serves to alienate them and drive recruitment to the alt-right. The correct response to "it is okay to be white" is not "that's a racist statement that you can't say" but "yes, obviously, moron".
White nationalism is really just the dumbest shit ever, but this complete and utter refusal to understand the root causes of the movement only helps them. It is, quite literally, what the terrorists want.
If you went through the process that the comment says, you might find out that you do not simply know the facts and that you are in fact biased. Do check your sources, their agenda and how that affects their framing of their reporting.
I have to wonder why you're so determined to defend a phrase coined by neo-nazis, used by the Ku Klux Klan and other known white nationalists, and whether or not you have a bias of your own.
Do you see how absurd it is to present an anti-racist slogan and a racist slogan as equivalent? Your logical contortions require the removal of all context from the discussion. Context is important. In this case, the context is that the overwhelming majority of this phrase's usage is as a white nationalist slogan. You're deliberately ignoring this in an incredible attempt to paint anti-racist activists as equivalent to racist activists.