Depends on which definition of "racism" you go by, as there's different dictionary definitions (which everyone roughly understands) and then there's a far more complex definition of "racism" used in academic disciplines, such as the social sciences, which is where the idea originates that non-whites can't be "racist" because racism requires power + privilege or majority status to be valid.
Whether racial preservation is or isn't "racist", is immaterial, because I don't think "racism" is necessarily wrong. I think trying to avoid the term makes it worse as you're reinforcing the idea of "racism" as a great social taboo, which leads to atrocities like Rotherham happening and people cucking themselves when they can't be honest about why they oppose certain kinds of immigration, leading them to hide behind proxy issues, let's be totally honest, most anti-immigration people (I know this doesn't include you) would definitely prefer if all our immigrants were Germans, Norwegians or Aussies rather than Pakistanis, Somalis and Nigerians. They instinctively know that those of Anglo-Celtic/NW European stock are a natural fit for our society, that the offspring of these people will automatically assimilate and be indistinguishable from their own children, the others aren't.
The left loves this taboo because it gives them power over discourse.