Pondering this a little more, and I think the base "problem" with racial alignments is either a non-problem or a new problem.
The non-problem argument is: if you actually read the whole books, DnD has almost never had absolute alignment, and in those cases it wasn't really about morality. Orcs or drow or whoever have never been portrayed as always irredeemably evil, (even when no good examples were given) - even celestials can fall which means fiends must be able to rise. The only "always always evil" creatures are undead, and that's because the negative energy they run on is itself classified as evil. No matter how she behaves, a vampire pings as evil, and if you removed the evil she'd be a well-dressed corpse. The outrage against 'orcs are always evil' is against something that isn't really there. (except maybe in certain home games, but we shouldn't hold WotC accountable for that.)
The new problem argument is: why is this suddenly a discussion in 5e? Is the text less clear about these things? Is the audience different? Is it really just a fringe group of very loud complainers? I'm inclined to dismiss the last option - there's always been whiners but there do seem to be a lot more confusions these days - and the 5e text does not read the same way as, say 3e's descriptions of monster alignments. But without real numbers I can't really say.