I agree that the intense focus on changing names and appearances in general is at best a waste of time. It's a very US/UK-centric discussion. "Master/slave" ha

I agree that the intense focus on changing names and appearances in general is at best a waste of time. It's a very US/UK-centric discussion. "Master/slave" has no relevance at all in many countries like Sweden where serfdom (träldom) was forbidden or else ended in the 13th century and never involved foreign peoples. "Whitelisting" and "blacklisting" have never been associated with skin pigmentation. This seems like a paranoid interpretation. Meanwhile, the real problems still remain. I will say that I think even the author makes a serious mistake in framing the discussion around skin color. These ideas about race that prevail in the discussion are not helpful and stem from poor scientific work in the 18th to 20th century. The genetic diversity of Africa is more diverse than the rest of the world (https://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article/study-africans-more-genetically-diverse-rest-world https://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article/study-africans-mo...). To refer to all as "black" (or worse, "Black" with a capital B) is a simplification that has no relevance today.