Richard Dawkins is an atheist philosopher and vocal critic of religions. He works to promote science, skepticism, rationality, and secular humanist thought. Unfortunately, recently Richard Dawkins’ criticism of Islam has increasingly been sliding into plain old bigotry – not based upon any sound scientific or any empirical evidence, which he claims to be a proud advocate of.
Richard Dawkins suggests the rise of Islamist terrorists is due to the Muslims’ ‘failure in science, engineering, medicine’. This is about as logical as George W. Bush, who once proclaimed terrorism was a result of them hating America for ‘our freedom’. There are many theories behind the rise of terrorism and terrorist experts attribute it to injustices in the foreign policy of America and other western nations. Robert Pape, a terrorism expert, cites that what is often considered ‘Islamic terrorism’ by Muslims, actually has secular motivations. He writes:
‘The central fact is that overwhelmingly suicide-terrorist attacks are not driven by religion as much as they are by a clear strategic objective: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland. From Lebanon to Sri Lanka to Chechnya to Kashmir to the West Bank, every major suicide-terrorist campaign—over 95 percent of all the incidents—has had as its central objective to compel a democratic state to withdraw.’ 
In this quote, Richard Dawkins believes the superiority of a culture can be determined by a scientific, technological and materialistic paradigm such as advances in engineering and medicine.
Interestingly enough, the Islamic have a long and a proud history of contributions to science and medicine as noted by Adam Smith:
“…the empire of the Caliphs [Muslims] seems to have been the first state under which the world enjoyed that degree of tranquillity which the cultivation of the sciences requires. It was under the protection of those generous and magnificent princes that the ancient philosophy and astronomy of the Greeks were restored and established in the East; that tranquillity, which their mild, just and religious government diffused over their vast empire, revived the curiosity of mankind to inquire into the connecting principles of nature.” *
But the ideal that a culture’s superiority is determined by their engineering or materialistic contributions is an ideal specific to white supremacist ideology. Indeed, since the beginning of European expansion, white people have always believed they were superior to the nations they conquered— Africans, Native Americans, and Australian Aborigines – due to their advanced technology and science and people of colors lack thereof. The Eurocentric paradigm has always defined ‘progress’ as more construction and more technology. Nations that weren’t technologically advanced were deemed as ‘primitive’ and worthy of being conquered. Yet, white people never realized that this constant construction of technology and progress being obtained by building more and more useless things was actually destroying the environment. White secular scientific society not Islam has allowed for the destruction of this plated via nuclear bombs and now global warming. This is not progress.
Moreover, while scientists in western societies have come up with cures for diseases, due to the capitalist nature of western governments they never practice preventable care. Instead, pharmaceutical companies profit off of sicknesses, diseases, and withhold cures all in the name of profit. In America, some African-American ghettos are left to die from preventable diseases all due to institutional racism that runs rampant in the health-care system. So what good is it to spend money, researching cures for diseases, when such medicine isn’t even available to the majority of the population? What good is your medicine when the social structure your society is organized around ensures non-white minority communities won’t have access to it?
Richard Dawkins seems to believe that the only way for someone to be recognized as a legitimate contributor to science is when Nobel Prizes are handed to them by a primarily white led committee. Few women have received a Nobel prize when compared to men. Does this mean women are inferior to men? Of course not, the European colonial nations colonized Muslims in a violent manner—that is the reason they lag behind in science and the emphasis on the Nobel Prizes to ‘prove’ that one’s contributions is both Eurocentric and racist. Muslims were contributing to science long before there was such a thing as a Nobel Prizes. One author in explaining a great irony in Richard Dawkins anti-Islamic views wrote:
“The very paper he writes his atheist diatribes on came to Europe via Islamic hands, the Greeks he builds his arguments on was preserved via Muslim philosophy. And the garbage he should throw his work into came via the Islamic impetus that gave birth to the European renaissance.”
To have a valid comparison Richard Dawkins suggest we subtract awards handed for Peace Prizes.
If one were to use this same method on the Black community, they would discover only one Black person has won a Nobel Prize in an area other than peace and literature. Should white supremacists now use this methodology to prove how inferior black people are? It would be a flawed one considering Black Muslims have been contributing to science long before a group of white men decided to give out nobel prizes for it.
Prior to slavery, West Africa was home to some of the richest and most prosperous civilizations in the world. The Kingdom of Mali was the intellectual center of the world at the time— a black Islamic Kingdom, home to Timbuktu University. Manuscripts were found indicating that these black scholars discovered the rotation of the planets long before their western counter-parts and made significant discoveries in astrology, geology, mathematics, physics, and many other areas. In addition to Mali, there was also Songhai, Ghana and Jenne – a civilization that performed eye cataracts surgery during medieval times.
Concerning some of these manuscripts, Michael Palin writes that the Kingdom of Mali
“has a collection of scientific texts that clearly show the planets circling the sun. They date back hundreds of years . . . Its convincing evidence that the scholars of Timbuktu knew a lot more than their counterparts in Europe. In the fifteenth century in Timbuktu the mathematicians knew about the rotation of the planets, knew about the details of the eclipse, they knew things which we had to wait for 150 almost 200 years to know in Europe when Galileo and Copernicus came up with these same calculations and were given a very hard time for it.”[3
A Black Muslim scholar named Al-Jahiz theorized an earlier version of the theory of evolution long before Charles Darwin who seems to be Richard Dawkins Idol.
After a long study of animals, Al-Jahiz was the first to put forward his view of biological evolution in his Book ofAnimals, which contains the germs of many later evolutionary theories (animal embryology, evolution, adaptation, animal psychology and sociology) “11”.First of all, al-Jahiz’s attempts were made in a truly scientific spirit to classifV animals in a linear series, beginning with the simplest and continuing to the most complex; and at the same time, he arranged them into groups having marked similarities; and these groups were divided into sub-groups to trace the ultimate unit in the species “4
Next Richard Dawkins suggest Steven Pinker should receive a Nobel prize for literature.
Steven Pinker, published a euroentric book entitled ,’The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined’ suggesting that since the rise of western hegemony violence has been in decline. The book is nothing more than an apologetic for western imperialism. In reality, the world has been less violent to white people but people of color every day face gratuitous violence.
This is the man who Richard Dawkins believes should receive an award for his eurocentric publications. Richard Dawkins believes the only way one can make valid contributions to science is if it is approved by a white led committee who hands out awards. IF not, he will continue to portray an entire group of people as violent brutes who make no contributions to society. This is the ideology of white supremacy!