"And if you wanted to get technical, many African Americans have had "a Europen father and an African mother - or if you prefer, an African father and a European mother" but I understand that you meant that jazz is built on the African and European musical traditions."

Read again Azizi.

You know I know this, as you have read comments from me explaining the logic to other people. But these are political matters.

In the quote above, you are referring to the political and social relities of being an African American, ie someone who has any degree of African blood in their veins thus rendering them inferior in the eyes of the state at that time and in the eyes of much of society to this day.

I am talking about the Geneology of a musical style.

You may justifiably argue that if all americans with any degree of african heritage should be classified in the same category then the it is double standards to take a different approach to music with a similar ancestry.

However, what is really happening there is recognition of how cruelly unfair it is that Blacks - whatever their ancestry - should suffer discrimination at all.

It does not infer ownership, either moral or actual. It puts in the spotlight just how insane the realities of slavery, segregation and racism were/are.

And if we did decide to give ownership of Jazz to Americaans only if they had a degree of African blood in their veins we would be doing a disservice to all those white musicians who helped make it what it is - and some from other countries too, like Stephan Grapelli and Django Reinhardt.