Elaborating....
Sticking strictly to the U.S. (as that would meet with the 'always been whites vs. blacks'), I think it is identity politics that says one particular group needs (or is reliant) on another group for its political life. I think African Americans (AA) politically need to be seen as American first and specific individual identities a distant second. So distant that when it comes to anything that may disparage the individual identity, help would be to get that out of the way. Yet, that type of thing exists for all Americans, obviously some more than others historically. But not void in any group that I'm currently aware of. Perhaps not strong disagreement with your use of empathy, but I think that need not be based on the specific identity rather than the American part. Americans being empathetic toward/with each other, with notable exception of (so called) Americans that are illegally here. Since AA has been freed and are de facto legal Americans, then this is non-issue except in possible individual cases, which again is true for all possible sub-groups. Just saying 'illegals' are the only one to marginalize and for as long as country does exist is reason to not be empathetic without restraint. With AA, if there is something they actually need, it is to not need to rely on WA. Finding commonality and brotherhood in WA, or all Americans is something I'd say is (great) desire, rather than need.
I see this currently as a two way street between the two sub-groups, and a two way street within each sub-group's split personality amongst own selves. Meaning some WA are antagonistic toward each other over this particular issue of "how best to serve the AA community." And that in and of itself is not antagonism that goes just one way, but both ways. Then, within AA sub-group, there is similar antagonism among some people. I think overwhelming majority are in vein of - we're all Americans, playing for same team, are like brothers/sisters, and are essentially color blind. But that doesn't get reported on news, so seems super special when experienced in everyday American life. I see it as the norm, even while it is possible to consider it being optimistic, given the antagonism that is promoted in media.
I see this as perpetuating the media version of the antagonism. This could be seen as going both ways via other media reports. I don't see Trump as particularly antagonistic toward AA. Toward Latino Americans, I kinda see that. Toward AA, not really. While not 100% sure of sub-group voting numbers in recent elections, I'm under impression that more Latino Americans voted for Trump (therefore support his vision) than AA's that voted for Trump. I think AA's have fallen for idea that only one party is truly looking out for them and therefore in their best interest to always vote for that party. Yet, as noted in this recent election, that same party has held mayorship and common council majorities in many U.S. cities, for several decades, where the plight of inner cities (made up of predominantly AA's) continues to worsen. Which suggests the one party allegiance isn't actually working out well for AA's unless there's a long term strategy that is currently at work and which very few (I'd say no one) are aware of what that strategy is.
