Eublet, if it makes you feel any better, I do agree with you to a certain extent. But it does seem, to me, that you give more credit to genetically based differences than they are probably deserving of.
Nature defined us first, and made us different through natural selection. Races became what they were over time to adapt to the environments they lived in. Some traits became more advantageous than others, and they persist to this day as predominant traits we can identify the races by.
The rise of civilization took us in a related but different course - humans themselves began to select traits and promote their survival. Part of nature's role is removed by civilization.
It is only recently that interracial marriages are becoming more than an oddity, and the lines between the races - those few genes that almost exclusively frequented particular groups in particular places - are beginning to blur.
But despite physical traits, culture is the ultimate means of overriding what we are born with - what would help or hurt us in a wild, uncivilized, anarchic world. Culture cannot make up for everything, but I think you're discrediting its ability to make many physical differences ineffectual.
Cultures are built with specific groups in mind - they are designed to cater to the traits of the group. It fosters positive identity, in-group pride, a sense of belonging, a sense of who we are. And what better way to begin than by building it around what makes us alike or different?
Rap, R&B, Jazz, Soul, Blues - they were developed by blacks, for blacks. But that was only in the beginning. The beauty of music is that, as an art form, it is not as restrictive as ethnicity or gender. We see more black bassists playing in these genres than any other ethnic group. And yes, we know there are exceptions... but it's more than that.
What we see is not all that can be. You make the assertion that blacks tend to be naturally better at bass. But bass is like any other instrument; anyone can play them, and there are no limitations on the music. The claim that blacks can groove better on bass because of inherent physical advantages makes the following assumptions:
1) That the genres your assumptions are based on feature what you perceive to be the best bass playing.
2) That the inherent physical advantages you suggest tend to be essential for good bass playing.
3) That other genres don't speak to you the way that your favorite ones do.
And therein lies the problem. Your argument has its merits, but what I have a serious problem with is the measurement of quality. And quality cannot be quantified in universal terms.
I admire Victor Wooten, but the Flecktones aren't on my list of favorite bands. Is this blasphemy? Maybe to you. Does this mean I have bad taste in music? Maybe to you. Does this mean that I don't know what a good bassist really is? Maybe to you.
I think you're getting my point by now. But let's continue...
Compare an album from a profound metal group with white members, like Pantera. Not everyone's cup of tea, I'd imagine, but there are few, if any, metal groups with black members that sound even remotely like that. And I bet there are even fewer that can sound as good - to my ears. My next example: B.B. King. I'm sorry, George Thorogood, but you'll never rock the blues like B.B. King does. But again, what do you notice? My opinions are just that - opinions. A general consensus isn't going to change what I think about who's better.
So what's my general point? At the end of the day, physical traits don't really matter. It may give a black bass player an advantage, but only for certain things - just like any other trait. If he can't play something that speaks to me, that opens my mind, that means something to me... then it doesn't matter how "good" someone else thinks his playing is, because clearly it wasn't good enough to win me over. But I'm just one person.
And that's why no individual is qualified to make judgments of art and artists that are universally true... not even generally true... not even generally true for a long period of time. Music changes, tastes change, people change. Is Elvis still the King? Sure, if you grew up with him. He had a great voice. But is it the greatest voice ever? My dad thinks so, but I don't. There you go... I, within the groups I identify with, within the generation I identify with, has changed the definition of what being the "best" means. And now Mr. Presley's smooth, deep vocals aren't so great anymore.
A particular white metal bassist may have the fastest fingers on the planet, and a particular black funk bassist may have a groove that no one else can match, but unless those bassists can win me over, then they're not really that great to me.
So really, now... can you still say that blacks still have a natural advantage for grooving on the bass? Of course you can, because it's your opinion, based on what you define as quality grooving.
It narrows down to one thing: what you and I think.
EDIT: On an odd side note... I'm honestly very impressed with this thread. It's quite an eye-opener... there's a lot to be learned from everything that has been said here, no matter how open-minded or close-minded it appears, no matter how rational or irrational it seems. Eublet is indeed right about the nature of the argument... this thread certainly has opened the floor for discussions long overdue, in a world reluctant to talk about it head-on.
