Which villainous race(s) are next on the chopping block?

[RifleAvenger]

As others have said, hopefully all of them. Fantasy races are a fantasy about race, and it says something dark when said fantasy includes "these are the types of people it's ok to kill on sight."

The "Other" as an acceptable target for violence needs to go, along with biology-based moral essentialism.

Institutions and factions make for great "these are definitely the bad guys" villains once their means and motivations are established (and if the PCs don't know means or motivation, maybe they should hold their fire?). There is no need for a large group of villains to be delineated by 'race.'

It doesn't actually change anything. It's folly to believe DMs are going to rewrite their campaign worlds because WOTC changed the metadata of some races. Heroes need villains in order to do heroic stuff and those villains will be whatever race the DM decides they will be for whatever reasons the DM decides.

Whether the entire race is evil or just that tribe over there or just this one warlord here is irrelevant to the game as it is being played. It certainly matters as a topic of discussion/debate.

What the writer of a work portrays as the default matters a lot, especially to new players. Or those making use of official modules or adventures and don't want to spend a lot of time doing rewrites. It sets default expectations and tone. Most importantly in this case, it tells potential players whether they're dealing with a game where the foul ideology of biologic moral essentialism, and the cruel ideals and behaviors that spring from it, are objectively correct in the fiction of the default setting.

There is no rule in the book saying that a GM can't make whatever races "Always Evil" or do away with such a thing entirely, true. But what matters is whether the concept of "Evil races" is normalized or not.