Completely different error back then so today’s standards don’t apply. Times change.. What about white slavery? We white slave owners of white slaves racist?
The Irish slave trade began when James II sold 30,000 Irish prisoners as slaves to the New World. His Proclamation of 1625 required Irish political prisoners be sent overseas and sold to English settlers in the West Indies. By the mid 1600s, the Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat. At that time, 70% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves.
Ireland quickly became the biggest source of human livestock for English merchants. The majority of the early slaves to the New World were actually white.
From 1641 to 1652, over 500,000 Irish were killed by the English and another 300,000 were sold as slaves. Ireland’s population fell from about 1,500,000 to 600,000 in one single decade. Families were ripped apart as the British did not allow Irish dads to take their wives and children with them across the Atlantic. This led to a helpless population of homeless women and children. Britain’s solution was to auction them off as well.
source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-irish-slave-trade-the-forgotten-white-slaves/31076
It's a little silly to rant about the racism of individuals in an era when the concept of "racism" didn't exist and pretty much everybody was racist. But it's also silly to say that someone could own Black slaves and support the institution of slavery and (explicitly or implicitly) support the ideas that underlay that institution and not be what 21st century Americans would have to call a racist.
Where that leaves us I don't know, but how could you support and financially benefit from an institution that rested on the inferiority of a whole race and not be what a much later era would call a racist? If the thinking of the time had been more subtle about racial inferiority I might be more inclined to agree with you, but the opinions expressed at the time were far from subtle.