History books are biased towards the opinion of scholars and governments, and seldom explore what most people think. I like to treat people of the past like human beings that were able to think for them selves, and I don’t think they were much different from your average person today.

During the horrors of European colonization, governments had vested interest in treating indigenous peoples in their colonies as sub-human, and they sponsored whichever scholar to portray them as such. So I think it is very natural that we today view Europeans of the past as extremely racist bunch (their governments certainly were). But do wonder how many regular people were influenced by the racist frenzy of their governments. My guess is probably about as many as in Europe today.

I think your point has some merits, but ultimately, intent doesn't matter: action does. if the West keeps funding Israel's genocide in Gaza, then yes, it's because they believe the Palestinians are sub-human. Haven't you seen the outpouring of support for Ukraine since they were invaded? Yet, Western nations are funding (not overlooking, but actively paying for) something worse - a continuous, ongoing genocide - and it's supposed to be an oversight?

I disagree that intent does not matter when judging the morality of an action. I believe this is the supermajority view in the west. Which doesn’t make it right, of course, I just assumed we all thought that and if you don’t I’m not going to argue with you about it.