4 ms·
> I would absolutely say that Dawkins was in fact "going after him" and being an asshole, even if he probably didn't fully understand why Don't forget that Daw
by chimeracoder 11y ago
> I would absolutely say that Dawkins was in fact "going after him" and being an asshole, even if he probably didn't fully understand why
Don't forget that Dawkins said that Islamophobia is a 'non-word'[0].
Dawkins was being an asshole, and he definitely knew why. Ignoring Ahmed Mohamed's religion and race and pretending like it's not relevant doesn't change the fact that this entire incident is inextricably linked to the fact that he is Muslim and not white.
[0] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/richard-dawkins-defends-ahmed-mohamed-comments-and-dismisses-islamophobia-as-a-non-word-10515389.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/richard-dawkins-def...
- Karunamon 11y agothis entire incident is inextricably linked to the fact that he is Muslim and not white. Based on what proof?
- dragonwriter 11y ago> Ignoring Ahmed Mohamed's religion and race and pretending like it's not relevant doesn't change the fact that this entire incident is inextricably linked to the fact that he is Muslim and not white. There are various forms of malice and incompetence that can explain the official acts at the basis of the incident, so while there is certainly plenty of reason to think that might be a significant factor, I think its far from clear that it is. The responses to the incident from various circles certainly provide plenty of evidence of both racism and Islamophobia, but I don't think its fair to say that it is unambiguously the case that the whole incident boils down to that (though I don't think its particularly unlikely.)