Tell that to Charles Martel, the Crusaders, Ferdinand & Isabella, Don Juan of Austria, Jan Sobieski, Henri de La Rochejaquelein, Antonio Salazar, Engelbert Dollfuss, and Francisco Franco. Somehow Catholicism over the centuries has had quite a bit to do with defending one's homeland, people, and civilization against one's enemies, foreign and domestic.
(Immaculata001 thinks: Can't see the forest for the trees?)
You have portrayed all of these political figures as being central to Catholic religion, or political persuasion being being central to Catholic religion, when they are merely elements of Catholic culture and history -- whether or not one deems a political ideology worthy, feasible, desirable, etc has zero to do with actual spirituality.
You like Ferdinand and Isabella, Juan of Austria, and Jan Sobieski; I like Graham Greene, Flannery O'Connor, Andy Warhol, Edgar Degas, and Dorothy Day. All of these people were Catholic (very ironically, the person who seems to have had an extremely intense and committed spiritual life was Andy Warhol -- he went to Confession at least once a week, prayed the rosary, and had a private altar in his home, which he would not let any of his associates see; his Confessor and family came out with it after his death. Looks like Andy Warhol may have been seeking some humility...).
Catholicism is not monolithic. It never has been, and it never will be. When you see people congregate and agitate for spiritual, social, political, and aesthetic dictates that are monolithic, that is the least Catholic expression of Catholicism you can find. It is worldly. It is ego-driven. It is about power and acquiring status and being a member of an in-group. None of these people are saints, and we are allowed (I would say encouraged) to criticize and even reject ideals they conceived.
Further, these factors that dictate our dialogs, interactions, politics are not traditional -- the reactionary element in Catholicism has always been balanced or in dialog with people who are moderate, liberal, or modern. People who are claiming that Catholicism was monolithic have a distorted and mythological view of history and culture.
In the past, from what I have gathered from people and literature who actually lived in much earlier times, people would not feel comfortable having a personal litmus test to discern who was authentically Catholic and who was not -- one could describe a person as backsliding, a public sinner, immoral, etc, but no one would dare deny the legitimacy of their religion, seeing as one can't, if a person has been baptized, has access to the sacraments, and professes the Creed. Rather, it seems to me that people had an understanding of the cultural heritage that Catholicism was, its successes and limits in dictating culture and politics, and had an understanding that it was not monolithic.
What we are seeing now is not Catholicism, because it has little or nothing to do with the continual conversion of the individual, or the reconciliation to God -- in fact, it's becoming a religion or an ethos all of its own unconcerned with the worth of every individual soul...
Case in point: someone who is not a Catholic, but simply professes the social dictates and ideals of those in the "traditional Catholic movement" can question the legitimacy of an actual Catholic, who professes the Creed, receives the sacraments, has been baptized, and has had a multigenerational lineage of family members who have done the same, within a Catholic cultural context (some of whom became priests and religious, and nearly all of whom were raised in Catholic boarding houses or convents). In what trad fantasy land would a scenario like this have happened, in the past?
As far as racism in Europe goes, monarchism is only one supposed remedy for the problem of immigration. I see the problem of immigration in Europe as one of integration, access to economic resources, and cultural preservation. I don't know that imposing a rigid social hierarchy will remedy the problem, and I don't see any cultural supports necessary for monarchism in existence. And yes, if one believes others to be inferior to them, one is likely a racist. There is no need for a polemic because the world has come to an agreement.
"Liking your own kind" actually isn't very Catholic, either. If the early apostles did that, the only people who would be Catholic would be people who are culturally Jews.