There is a near-unceasing war against 'Xenophobia' in the modern west. It's more universal, more passionate than the war against 'Homophobia', and people who will still criticize same-sex marriage or sodomy in general will often turn on a dime and lambast xenophobia or anything in the ballpark of it. Even people accused of xenophobia usually fight back by trying to argue that others are the REAL xenophobes.
At heart, there is an obsession with denouncing anyone who dislikes change. Who wants to preserve almost anything about the life they know - the language spoken in their country, or even their city. The traditions they have ('tradition' is itself sneered at by default by many). Their habits, their temperaments, their loyalties, their tolerances - the desire to stand firm and preserve just about anything is seen as primitive retroactive behavior, and even yesterday's liberal attitude becomes today's out-of-date stance.
To express dislike at the idea that in a hundred years, or fifty years, or possibly even twenty years the country you know of will be of a near-completely different racial, cultural, linguistic, religious and intellectual makeup is a sign that you're intolerant, stupid and quite possibly dangerous on top of it all. You fear change, ergo you fear progress, ergo you are an enemy of all that's good.
People go along with this, as they'll go along with just about anything with the right prodding. But in the process, they fight back - subconsciously and naturally, even if undetectably.
And their weapon of choice is apathy.
They stop having children, or at least stop prioritizing their welfare. They lose attachment to their community. Some lose interest in their own lives, or maintain it only in pretty shallow ways - ways that benefit themselves, and if they benefit anyone else, that is at best a happy and usually temporary accident. They may be politically active, but their movements are unpredictable and without rhyme or reason. They're emotional, based on the extraordinarily immediate - what upsets them today. If they change their mind about what's desperately urgent in a week or a month or a year, you can point out their inconsistency and they won't care. They've already absorbed the idea that consistency is for savages.
Now, you can laugh at them - I sure do. Mock them, belittle them, and it's not always undeserved. But what has actually created them? Point at the media, point at the schools. Once again, I do the same, and there's some blame there. But I think there's more blame to be passed around than that. Did anyone ever teach them that it was perfectly acceptable - even noble - to want to preserve something more than a fucking park for the next generation? That they rightly had some say over who that next generation would even be?