I've been away from this particular discussion for a few days, and now (of course) have a couple of new observations.

I think that what The Shambles has been saying over his last few posts does not indicate that he's "up there somewhere in superior liberal utopian lala land" -- on the contrary, I think his position is more evidence of the point several of us have been trying to make -- that being black in Britain is not at all the same thing as being black in the US. In Britain, black folks have always been able to make their musical contributions (and to live their lives) *as individuals* in a way that has not always been possible for them in the US. In the US, black folks developed a distinct and separate subculture, which in turn has had a huge impact on the dominant culture, especially the musical culture.

PS to greg stephens -- I believe we agree much more than we disagree on this and related subjects, despite having traded a misunderstanding or two. I'm certainly impressed at your having played with Geno Delfose -- must have been a gas!
It may be true that in the UK, it's not especially relevant whether you're black or white, and not worth mentioning -- but believe me, in the US, it still makes a diffrence. Thankfully, not the same difference it made a generation or more ago, but being born and raised as a black person still entails the experience of living in a distinct subculture, sort of a world-within-a-world.

So yes, it may be that in the UK one's racial identity need not be relevant to this or that discussion, but it's not the same in the context of the US (or of American cultural/musical forms). In the US, being "black" is not just a matter of the color of one's skin -- it entails an entire cultural heritage as well, which *is* relevant to one's insights and opinions in a discussion of music, and well as the kind of contributions one might make as a player.