Why Western Muslim Blanqueamento has no perspectives?

White men’s miscalculation

or why Western Muslim Blanqueamento has no perspectives?

Marriages between different groups is a very sensitive issue – cause of many women`s, men`s and children`s feelings.

That`s why we should determine in the beginning of this article, that there is a difference between people, that consider their marriage as their own happiness and people that consider marriage as an identity-creating factory. We wish happiness to the first group of spouses, if their marriage doesn’t contradict Sharia law. But, determining this once more – this article is not about such people.

Though within European Muslim Converts the majority is the first group, there is another side – people, that consider marriage through the prism of their identity problem. Within them and also – within their shaykhs – there are people, that foster marriages between European converts and Non-European spouses. We`ll emphasize our attention on the fact that this is not people`s personal choice – it is their special race and cultural politics, that is fostering in some spheres. Let`s speak about this.

At first, let`s make a little excursion in history. When Europeans started colonizing America, they`ve chosen two models of cohabitation with locals: in North America, it was strategy of three groups` cohabitation – whites, blacks and colored were separated. In South America, otherwise, it was a unique policy, named “Blanqueamento” in Brazil. It`s plot – mixing and assimilating of locals and Afro-americans with whites, culturally and politically dominating above them.

It`s important to say, that to blacks and other non-Europeans natives, both of these policies are different forms of white supremacism. It`s important, cause lots of Europeans are considered, that they can be called racist, if they don`t want to mix with non-whites, but a person with a non-white wife and mixed children can`t be called a racist. But this is not true for “white supremacism” fighters. For them both the yankees with “one – drop rule” or the dixie plantators with black and colored concubines are racists. Segregation and assimilation are both inappropriate for them and considered as white supermacy.

Now, let`s go to our reality. Some part of white Muslim men, marrying non-European women, hope to implement this variant of western Islamic Blanqueamento. The issue is in difficulty with searching or preserving white Muslim women, or in a stereotype, that white blood is stagnating and it should be “freshed”. This position is true not only within white Muslims – western men, terrorized by their own feminist compatriots, having unlucky experience of marriage with them, are marrying immigrants from other continents. The estimation is such: immigrant women are not so fussy, as local Europeans – and their general mentality makes them they are more dependant of their spouses.

And it works on the spouse level. But it doesn`t work as an instrument of creating identities. Why?

Indeed, stimulating such marriages to create new Muslim generation – “new Europeans” – ideologies of Islamic Blanqueamento didn`t take into account, that the forming of such a society is made by outer environment. Communities can try to compete with society, but new generations are grown by societal environments. It is especially important, if we will think about some delicate issues, such as racial identity, that are given a wide berth, hoping, that Islamic identity will be the solution to their problems. And as a result – active forming of new generations` identity is made by media, culture, SMM and trends of society.

All this, generally is the “cultural hegemony”, as it named by Italian theoretic Antonio Gramchi. And during these last decades, the cultural hegemony is in left-wing hands. And what is said by this hegemony? It is taught them, that the rule of men is evil. That “white rule” is evil. That white men rule is double evil. And doesn`t Blanqueamento promote the power of white men? It`s the natural white male privilege. And, as a result, if even children love their fathers, they will rebuke all white males as a class. Nowadays, there are millions of white feminists and white lefts on West, that consider all society, built by white males as an absolute evil. In their cause, it is an ideological position, but mixed people often have their own difficulties, connected with their connection with other races.

We should understand: in whatever way multiculturalism ideologists try to enter new non-white characters as traditional Europeans in films and cartoons, history and culture of Europe (without little exceptions) are history of white people, hundreds of white generations. The question is: can person consider himself as a European, if he hate his ancestors? What will chain him with Europe? Language? But the sacred Islamic language is Arabic. So why is language seen as something that splits you from your nation`s roots – why it should be important to this new European Muslim?

Could this person have a difficult dialogue from the European side with non-European groups, that have no such difficulties, but have some bids to whites? Can we, at least, proselyte Islam to Europeans and defend their interests in Islam in the world of widening racial contradictions? Where is the place of these people?

We saw some efforts of white Americans, like Hamza Yusuf, in being arbiters between communities, cause their wives are non-European. But they face charges in white supremacism. It is not amazing, cause, as we`d understood, having non-white wives and common children gives no alibi to these people. More than that, prosecutors have fully determined identity (colored or black) – and they have direct pretenses to whites. But converts and their children, who are they? They wouldn`t like to be blacks, they can`t be holders of colored identity cause their powerful connection with European culture – but on the other hand, they won`t be whites neither.

It is sad, but obvious. These people didn`t count the fact that Blanqueamento politics can work only in a society, where white men rule. This way, children from non-white women will feel themselves as holders of their fathers` identity, of their culture and status. But, if descendants of white fathers are labeled with a guilt complex, labeled by shame for their white parents, for their supremacy with identity, nothing can be said about their European identity.

So, descendatns of white Muslim males have to live in conditions, where, on the one hand, they will lose their privileged status, but, on the other hand, they have to communicate with societies with improved identity. They have to stand strong and accomplish the mission of informing about Islam to Europeans, making a dialogue with non-European Muslim communities – and only communities with a strong identity can do it.

But what should children from such marriages do? People that are worried about their own identity have a choice. They can forever live with a white community – and it is their right. Or they can leave a white community – it`s also their choice. If a person with 50% of European ancestry will marry ordinary am European woman, their descendants will have 75% European ancestry. And if their children will do the same thing, they will have 90% of that ancestry. We don`t trust in the idiotic conception of the “one-drop rule” – genetics is not about possession, it`s about amount. Genetic test of Afrikaaners usually show 2% of African ancestry, and such ones of Afro-Americans show 20% of European blood – but this doesn`t affect their identification. Nevertheless, a human, that has non-European ancestry but who feels himself to be partly native European, can make his descendants` ancestry to the predominance of European genes, if this person will choose his spouse and if he educate his descendants accordingly.

This personal Blanqueamento could work on a personal level with people, that would like to merge with native European society or stay in it. But, looking on societal level, European Muslims should hold up their will of assimilating of non-Europeans and base on the strong footing of natural identity.

Editorial