› Richard Dawkins' family shown to have owned slaves
this is why i have an issue associating myself with other atheists. Richard says “oh, my money wasn’t obtained that way”, “my fortune is completely self-made”.
really Dawkins? so your childhood, your safe housing, good school, and college degrees (the money with which to acquire them) weren’t from generations of inheritance from this slavery money?? they even said in the article that his sister chills on one of the estates in Jamaica! what the fuck!
how about some muthafuckin reparations. and i’m not even Jamaican. they should find the descendants of those owned by his family, just so they can ask for their ancestors’ money back from him. how much did dehumanization cost? i don’t know. but let’s round it off at a couple million.
Problems I have with this:
1. children should never be held responsible for their parents actions (let alone past generations). If someones ancestor was a nazi and made money through the war and used that to travel to America, that ancestry would not be held against him today.
2. Nothing Richard Dawkins has ever said or done can be misread as supporting slavery
3. the point the reporter was trying to make was that maybe Dawkins has a gene programmed to support slavery. Which is completely ludicrous.
4. He has become extremely successful and deserves all the credit for that, not his ancestors. He’s a wonderful educator and has done amazing things for science.
I find that people in the scientific community are usually clear minded when it comes to social issues and this is why (in the scientific community) his reputation won’t be damaged by this.
problems i have with this:
1. i don’t think we should hold people accountable, necessarily. Dawkins can at least have the decency to acknowledge what his ancestors did and which he, like i said, STILL BENEFITS FROM. his sister LIVES either part time or fully on the estate. THE ESTATE INHERITED FROM THEIR SLAVE OWNING ANCESTORS. no, we do not inherit our parents issues, however, if you’re flashing the trinkets your ancestors stole from others and won’t even acknowledge a) that those trinkets were stolen and that b) the people who they were stolen from still have descendants, some of which are sure to be living in poverty. we all inherit the issues of our nation and of our family. it speaks to our own humanity and sense of empathy how we deal with that.
2. can you show me where i said he supports slavery? oh, right, i didn’t.
3. it doesn’t matter what point the reporter was trying to make. this is about him being a direct descendant of slavery money. whatever your issue is with the reporter should be put in the comment section of the link. not here.
4. to some degree, Dawkins’ education and consequential career and success are largely due to him. HOWEVER, to act as if his family, his upbringing, and their wealth had nothing to do with that is to lack the basic understanding of what being wealthy does for one. do you really think Dawkins could have acquired a degree from Oxford has he been raised by a restaurant cook? or had he been raised on a less safe, less suburban neighborhood? how many degrees do you think he would have if he had to put himself completely through college?
and while you’re thinking about those questions, go read a fuckin book as well. he’s done great things for science? jesus, get off his dick. no one is disputing this, and i’ve said before that The God Delusion is a fantastic book, and yes, he is a great educator. but what the fuck does this have to do with this post? right. nothing.
and CLEARLY, people in the scientific community (whatever that is…) are not “clear-headed” since they can be so humanistic on everything except very significant realities that involve and/or are the results of racism, colonialism, and slavery. oh, well, outside of being used as examples to criticize Abrahamic religions.
