Both honestly. At the very least I can not understand why they are already not labeled sub-species at minimum. As Ernst Haeckel said in his 'The History of Creation', "Varieties are commencing species". For over ten thousand years we had separation in very different environments, where groups encountered very different ways of life. New environments induce new ways of living which, over time, doubtlessly change the people themselves. And for groups living in tropical areas year round for hundreds of generations, it is clear that generation after generation of easy living, instant self-gratification and no need for much abstract or long-term planning has had some
effect and produced, like you said, what seems to be "barbaric animals" to the eyes of Whites.
It makes me sound a bit Lamarckian to stress habit and habitat so much, but I don't think it's totally false, natural selection plays a role as well though. Just look at moles, some varieties have lost their eyesight. Why? Because they don't use their eyes. Same with some types of fish