For what it's worth...
Ruemere didn't say it wasn't racist.
But everything, in every book, was "perspective oriented". And that perspective, in general, was "European vampires born and embraced in the mid to late middle ages".
The Ravnos were all Gypsies because the Elders hated Gypsies, and Ravnos, so they might as well hate 'em both together. The Giovanni are all stereotypically "italian", because that's what these centuries-old creatures viewed them as. The Assamites are religious wackjobs because, well, the Crusades, and such.
Or, phrasing it another way - when there were approachable (or player) Giovanni in my own chronicles, they weren't guilty of the crimes the bloodline was accused of. Neither were all the Ravnos in my games gypsies and criminals. And I felt like I was hewing pretty close to the interpretations from the books. Everyone thought (everyone being, 'the Elders') they were, which is why they're said to.
I actually always thought, and played it as, Vampire being "Racial Bias: The RPG" (in part). One of the unspoken advantages Neonates had over the elders was "breaking the rules" and actually <talking> to these despised "others".
...for what it's worth.
Edit: Oops. Assamites, in my game, were in fact religious nutjobs (being a cult, and such). But they weren't presented as an interpretation of Islam; they were presented as, you know, nutjobs. Although, I was in (didn't run) an Assamite game one time, and they were presented there with appropriate religious sensitivity. But I betcha the guys we assassinated didn't think so.
Edit2: Also oops, adding "s around "stereotypically italian". I guess what I'm trying to say is, "Yes, the books contain horribly racist elements; I agree with that; but much like, say, Clint Eastwood's character in Grand Torino, it allows the reader / watcher / player(s) to experience that vicariously, and to grow past it - and see that it's wrong, and why.