The party of Lincoln did not after a century get together and say "Aight Billy Bob it's time we get racist"
The only switch that occurred was a switch in the Democrat party's tactics. Otherwise known as the welfare state. It has failed miserably with one exception, it secured the black vote for decades. As was its intent. Republicans opposed this money pit for good reasons, not racism.
To quote an economist who is often call Uncle Tom by the left:
"The black family, which had survived centuries of slavery and discrimination, began rapidly disintegrating in the liberal welfare state that subsidized unwed pregnancy and changed welfare from an emergency rescue to a way of life."
Concrete projects and slums are the new plantations. You don't have to slave for Master to survive, simply vote for him.
The KKK could not have come up with a better scheme to keep black people down.
I shall never fight in the armed forces with a negro by my side ... Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.
— Robert C. Byrd
Robert Byrd didn’t switch sides after his filibuster to stop the CRA failed, he became a leader of the Democratic Party and the longest serving senator in the history of the United States. And I might mention a mentor of Hillary Clinton.
His name is on dozens of roads bridges and buildings yet not one liberal has called for the removal of an Exalted Cyclops of the KKK's name from these places.
Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Now, enough of this switch nonsense and back to subject.
In my opinion your scenario isn't racism, its common sense. It is based on observations and experiences.
And it is not prejudice. Prejudice is an opinion not based on experience or knowledge.
I'm sure that you don't consider Aboriginals a subhuman race of mongrels, that would of course be the French.