[ncmncm]

"Genes determine who's smart and who's dumb" would not be racist unless you suggested (or, worse, demonstrated) that the smart genes were concentrated in specific breeding communities, or lacking in (presumably other) such communities.

We have reason to believe that some such "smart genes" are inherited. That's not very egalitarian, but it is also not racist. The implication is that these smart genes are rare not only in your dispossessed underclass, but rare everywhere. In any place where their promise fails to be nurtured and cultivated, humanity is the poorer for it. By the numbers, if the genes are more-or-less equally distributed, the dispossessed include absolutely many more stewards of these genes than the privileged. Then, it is a crime against society for the privileged to have failed to nurture them wherever possible.

But of course it is not only carriers of "smart genes" who could provide a strong net benefit society as a whole by being well nurtured. Arguably, for every "smart gene" carrier who would give back more than the cost of the nurturing, there are many others who would also effloresce. The only way we know to identify and nurture them all is to nurture everybody and see who blooms. But that would cost money.