@Eli G
First, evolutionary theorie
s aren't "doctrine" and can't be fundamentally "racist" in and of themselves (though they can certainly be (ab)used for racist purposes).
The differences between geographic human groups that we use to define "races" will have largely developed after Homo Sapiens evolved rather than from characteristics of the preceding species. Otherwise we would likely have multiple different human species rather than just minor variations within the one.
Homo Sapiens likely evolved in one region (probably North Africa) and the successful species then spread to other parts of the world. As different groups continued to evolve in different environments, they each developed some different characteristics, either in direct response to those environments (e.g. darker skin in sunnier climes, more body fat in colder ones) or random mutations that (initially at least) compounded in closely related groups (e.g. red hair).
In general, the concept of "race" isn't really defined in biology, and even collieries like "sub-species" don't have definitive definitions or fixed measures. Because modern humans travelled and interbred so much more than most other animals, it makes defining any human sub-species even more difficult. Even most "standard" racial groupings are much fuzzier and difficult to distinguish when you really look in to them, and will likely continue to become more so.