When white man arrived in America, there was a culture clash. The white man did not understand the “Indian” (so much so that they labelled them as “people living in India”… ) Now, white man sees the Indian and his axe, being barbaric, not having any fancy technology, not having a notion of property ownership, and he thinks, “Savages, their lifestyle and wisdom do not make sense to me. If we clash, I will kill the Indian, for I do not understand him. Besides, if he wants me to understand his wisdom, he can learn English. The burden of proof of the wisdom of his ways, lies with him. I understand my worldview and it makes enough sense to me.”
So he goes on his merry way, advocating genocide. A beautiful culture is destroyed. A natural human heritage. A way of living in harmony with nature. So instead, after destroying the Indian, white man continues to destroy the planet.
This is what I see Richard Dawkins doing. It’s all good and well, he can happily be an atheist, he can live his life. But when he calls for memetic genocide to destroy religion, he does so without understanding the language. And he expects the religious to explain to him, in his scientific terms, what the value of their culture is. And trust me, there is value.
If you want to understand, you can’t sit back and laugh while the Indian tries to learn English. You need to help him. We need to open dialogue, else we will simply continue in our genocidal ways. Clearly something modernistic human beings love doing. Just look at the history of colonialism.
Richard Dawkins is a colonialist.
And he knows this. He realises he may have made a strategic blunder. Give the guy some credit, please.