The tactic where someone (or a group/ideology) espousing racist views deflects criticism by claiming they are the real victim of racism (or falsely accused of it)—is most precisely called DARVO.

DARVO stands for Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender. It is a well-documented manipulation strategy, originally identified in the context of abuse (especially sexual/perpetrator accountability), but widely applied to racist rhetoric and behavior in modern discussions:

• Deny the racism ("That's not racist" / "I didn't mean it that way" / "You're misinterpreting").
• Attack the accuser ("You're the real bigot for calling me racist" / "This is just cancel culture").
• Reverse Victim and Offender — flip the roles so the original perpetrator/ideology positions itself as the persecuted party ("I'm being silenced/oppressed/victimized by accusations of racism" / "Anti-racists are the true racists").

This is especially common when a racist ideology or figure tries to maintain plausible deniability and moral high ground while continuing harmful rhetoric. In racial contexts it's often labeled institutional DARVO or systemic DARVO when used by political movements, media, or institutions to push back against anti-racism efforts (e.g., framing DEI critics or CRT opponents as the oppressed group facing "reverse racism").

Related/adjacent terms people sometimes use (though less exact):

• "Crying racism" or "playing the victim card" to deflect.
• Claiming "reverse racism" as a shield.
• "Weaponizing accusations of racism" against critics.

But DARVO captures the full sequence outlining most cleanly, including the false-victim flip that hides behind the shield of being "unfairly called racist." It's become a standard way to name this exact pattern in anti-racism and psychology discussions.