>I would say that subjectively focusing on a narrow aspect of history is in fact ignoring most of it. That is what you seem to be doing. Which is exactly why I wrote the article.

History is very important when discussing history.. and I am not ignoring most of it.

>All you've done is selectively edit history and attribute motives to people who made their views very clear. You cling to racism because you don't understand the arguments at play.

Oh, Key made his views very clear? Well you could have ended this entire argument by showing where.

>If Key had meant to isolate his reference to Black Slaves, he would have. He did not because the term was intended to be broader in its application.

If Key was referring to people who were forced into the war at gun point, I doubt he would be celebrating their deaths.

>You've validated the concern that prompted me to address this issue: Many people would rather feel good about fighting "racism" instead of putting the work in to actually identify it.

As I have already pointed out, even if the song is referring to black slaves, thay doesn't make it racist. Just dark and ironic.

Lets try another approach shall we? Can you find one other person at the time who refered to captured british born americans fighting for the british as slaves? Its not the term I would use, its like referring to conscripted soldiers in ww2 as slaves. If you can, I will concede the argument, though it doesn't make the anthem any less fucked up.