Contra Dawkins, I hold that we need to mobilise the moderate majority to keep it in check.

Some of the moderate majority already agree with him, e.g. the UK bishops who joined with him in opposing the introduction of creationism in some UK schools.

But it's difficult for them because the extremists will say to the moderates "our views are based on faith just like yours".  Hence Dawkins' argument that moderates lend respectability to the extremists (both being based on faith) - but not saying that the moderates are therefore responsible for what some extremists decide to do. So he thinks that we need to get rid of the excuse of faith in general in favour of reason and evidence.

He clearly has just the "hope" which you recommend - the hope that even the US might change to become as secular as most of Europe (which didn't take that long, but nor was it so fast we can afford to do nothing to speed it up). But given the state of the US now, he does not think one can just complacently sit and watch and wait. Damage is being done now and so he's doing his bit - and he's said he doesn't think it's the ONLY way (even though, as I pointed out before, his supposed stridency has been exaggerated). Aren't there better targets for criticism ?

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.