Racial Inversion
It seems initially like it shouldn't matter too much --although the reactionary position suggests that it does, and I'll explain why.
Race shouldn't be described as an aspect of our character but rather a predicate of our character --in other words, races can be easily categorised because of their inherent and unchangeable nature. When two people of the same race conceive a child, the child will inherit the same racial traits as their parents --both mental and physical. There is a reason people feel connections to land or groups, it's because of their race and this is evident in racially shared memories --as proven by experiments with rats and electric shocks of course. There is a definite answer behind what it means to be French or Italian or African --however, in modern times that have been diluted through race mixing and universal homogeneity. When we see a child of our race next to a child of an opposite race, we will feel a stronger instinct towards the child of our own 'tribe.' We're not separated just by 'the colour of our skin,' with race comes different muscle distributions, new unique bones, bone density, skull shape, brain functions, etc.
It is out of place for Zeus or Odin to be Arabic, and that is because race also dictates gods. The pantheon of gods is a structure of description for our reality, each god represents a part of nature and acts like dramatic humans --they embody sections of nature, hence why they don't act like God in the Abrahamic religious sense. The complexity of the pantheon, the rituals of the people, and the seriousness with which the gods are taken are wholly dependent on the race and environment --because the environment will alter the race. If the environment is conducive to an easier physical life, then we typically see the projection of the people's nature onto the pantheon, while if the land is dry and the sun is heavy, the people will take the pantheon's rituals more seriously and will structure it in a simpler way to more accurately depict reality. This is pertinent to the question because to invert the predicate for the structure is to depart it with reality in a way that becomes inherently obvious to us. This is the same in stories based on historical events; it doesn't make sense for a tribe of white Europeans in Africa with spears to be fighting a highly advanced black society with rifles because there is a discontinuity between the predicate --the race-- and the results.
When we say the "Faustian spirit" of the Germans, it is meant that they have a racial identification with that spirit; how can a spirit be applicable to one race but not another? Because it is unique to them. How can you direct a film about Hitler leading all his people --who have now been retroactively changed into black people or Jews-- into war by appealing to their Faustian spirit? You can't, they don't have a Faustian spirit.
We need to create new stories about other races and their own racial spirit if we want to change the dynamic, we cannot superimpose a race onto a classic story --especially if it's already present in the society's consciousness--, it is chaos through inversion and mirrors the current state of society; we are losing our racial identity and the corrosion of our stories is symbolic of the change.