While I did not know someone has used related ideas in a very different and pre-existing agenda, I can't take hyperbolic accusations of racism seriously anymore. They aren't intellectually serious or sincere. I would be surprised if it were controversial at all that immigration is widely recognized as all of:
a) a policy tool.
b) an economic management tool.
c) a demographic management tool.
d) a populaiton management tool.
e) a strategic political tool.
In the cases of Mexico, Libya, and France/EU managing the flow of irregular immigration has historically been a diplomatic and geopolitical tool. The impetus behind the former US admins border wall was because the government of Mexico was using migrant caravans as a diplomatic negotiating lever. Libya's former dictatorship was tolerated by the west because it stabilized the region and limited African migration to Europe. Migrants have always been horribly exploited by their own governments and those of host countries, and using them as political tools is part of why.
In the case of Canada, regular and irregular immigration are not really distinguished (as to say someone is illegal is uncouth) and there is an explicit and public federal policy to settle people in rural regions, and in political ridings (districts) where the election margins to win a parliamentary seat are in the single digit thousands. Thinking that policy is cynical and unethical is not racist, and the accusation is a bad faith argument.