Sorry for the late reply, but it seems you misunderstood what I meant about Dunning-Kruger in that it has to do with ability or perhaps knowledge in a defined field but not in something like a subjective experience.
It'd be confirmation bias or some other thing but not Dunning-Kruger.
So you're drawing a distinction between expertise and experience and saying Dunning-Kruger applies to one not the other. Huh. Perhaps we could dig into that at some point, but you can't ignore the parts of my comment that you don't like.
Can you demonstrate that a good portion of the indicators I listed in my previous comment are reversed to favour minorities over whites in white-minority areas?
If you can't, then your claim to have experienced equivalent discrimination is incorrect, and uninformed. Perhaps you have a deeper understanding of discrimination (personal or institutional) than being "beaten up" but so far you've not shown or hinted at it.
Without that evidence, your argument falls apart, and you come across as an uninformed white man arguing that uninformed white men should be encouraged to ignore others. It's an argument with no credibility.
Do you see the problem?
(I'm not being unreasonable, I know getting evidence is work and my offer to help with some legwork stands, although I suspect it'd be an eye-opening experience for you)
It'd be confirmation bias or some other thing but not Dunning-Kruger.