Yes, this is true, but again, whenever I talk about the Atlantic slave trade, as I very clearly was here, for a specific purpose that had nothing to do with demonising white people, people like you feel the need to heroically point out that slavery predates this particular example of it. Do you feel the need to point out that genocide predates the Holocaust every time somebody mentions that?

As you ably point out, this was the only example of slavery predicated entirely on the colour of the slaves' skin which is why I referred to it in this section about racial discrimination. As you say, "we" (what do you mean "we" kemosabe) didn't enslave black people because of racism, racism was invented as a justification to legally enslave black people. I know this. I have no idea why you imagine you need to tell me. Black people have been living with the hangover of racism's invention ever since.

And more to the point, I've never even hinted at the idea that we can tell good people from bad people by the colour of their skin. In fact, a casual glance at my writing will show you that I strongly believe the exact opposite. But you see a black guy tangentially refer to the slave trade, in one line of a 1200+ word article, and you assume that I'm saying a whole bunch of other things that I'm not saying at all. How do you think that comes across to me?