You keep falling into the same ditch. I have never described “two kinds of homo sapiens” because I don’t like applying a Linnaean term and taxonomy on an ancient text with a very different agenda and focus.
All sorts of things can be misapplied and become “a natural defence for racism and imperialism.” You are headed towards an Argument from Negative Consequences logical fallacy.
When Jesus divided people into sheep versus goats, was that providing a natural defence for racism and imperialism? Some would say yes and cite the Crusades. (And they would be heading towards the same logical fallacy.)