EssaysKevin Alfred Strom

Multiracialists Are Crazy, Part 3

KAS,color,portrait,100x134Verbal tricks are used to obscure the reality of racial differences; learn how to recognize them.

by Kevin A. Strom (pictured)

MULTIRACIALISTS are those who believe it is right and good and beneficial to force multiple races — multiple peoples — to live under the same government. Multiracialists like to use word tricks to deceive the public. Their leaders tend to be from a group with a very high average verbal IQ, and that makes them very effective con men. They do two things with words. They use them to make the truth seem false or absurd — or to make falsehoods seem true.

It’s easy to do the former. If I told you that, “There are those who seriously believe that most people have greater than the average number of legs,” you’d probably laugh at me. You’d have visions of people with three legs walking around everywhere. “No sane person could seriously believe that,” you’d say. “Only a nut would believe that ‘most people have greater than the average number of legs’ — that’s ridiculous!” But you’d be wrong. I would have tricked you with words. It is certainly true that most people have greater than the average number of legs. But I’ve expressed it in a way that sounds counterintuitive, making it easy to dismiss.

Analyze the statement carefully. What is meant by “most people”? That means more than 50 per cent. of human beings. It is certainly true that more than 50 per cent. of human beings have two legs. Therefore most people have two legs. And what is the average number of legs that people have? It’s pretty close to two — but it isn’t exactly two. A minuscule number of people are born with tragic birth defects which give them more than two legs each. But their numbers are dwarfed by those who, sadly, have been born without a leg or legs, or who have lost a leg or legs through accident. So the average number of legs is some small fraction less than two, say 1.99 legs. Since almost everyone has two legs, it is indubitably true that “most people have greater than the average number of legs.”

If I had put it in forthright language you would not have found the truth so absurd-sounding. This is the kind of word-trick the multiracialists play all the time.

They tell us that “haters” and “racists” see significant differences between the races, which is absurd, they say, because the genetic structure of human races is so similar. As the pioneering Human Genome Project had just finished sequencing the human genome in the year 2000, former President Bill Clinton and other multiracialists rushed to assure us that any racial differences found would be insignificant — Clinton’s speechwriters even going so far as to insert the subject into his State of the Union address in January, 2000, saying, “We are all, regardless of race, 99.9 percent the same.”

But that’s essentially a word-trick. Even if the genes show a 99.9 per cent. similarity in structure, that does not mean we’re 99.9 per cent. the same. As researcher John Entine states:

‘We share 98.4 percent of our genes with chimpanzees, 95 percent with dogs, and 74 percent with microscopic roundworms. Only one chromosome determines if one is born male or female. There is no discernible difference in the DNA of a wolf and a Labrador retriever, yet their inbred behavioral differences are immense. Clearly, what’s meaningful is which genes differ and how they are patterned, not the percent of genes. A tiny number of genes can translate into huge functional differences.’

Clearly, the multiracialists have conned us with deceptive words. That 0.1 per cent. difference in genetic structure is extremely important. It makes for gigantic differences in behavior, in appearance, in intelligence, and in the capacity to create and maintain a high civilization. It makes what we would subjectively call a 1,000 per cent. difference in our lives. It is the difference between Vivaldi and beating on a log. It is the difference between magnetic resonance imaging and mashed monkey brains. It is the difference between Ulalume and Umgawa. It is the difference between a microprocessor and a shrunken head on a stick.

Far more illuminating and useful than raw numbers of genetic similarity — which superficially make people appear to be mostly the same as microscopic roundworms — is the genetic distance between human races. Those of you reading this program on the Internet can look at the following graphic representation of the relative genetic distance between 42 human population groups. This data is from The History and Geography of Human Genes by Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi and Piazza. It shows, in graphical form, largely what centuries of observation and common sense have been telling us all along.

Genetic Distance

As you can see from the graph, the European peoples are almost alone in a corner by themselves, close to some closely related Caucasian ethnicities, with the North Asians and South Asians and Africans in distinct and separate clusters in widely separated parts of the graph. Science has validated what the racialists have been saying all along. This is what CBS, ABC, and Bill Clinton don’t want you to see.

Also interesting about the graph of relative genetic distance is the fact the center, what one would consider the nominally “average” part of the graph, is nearly empty, while the periphery or edge area of the graph is relatively full — making the genetic distance graph look something like a graph of the expanding universe. The picture painted is not one of panmixia, but of races evolving away from each other, away from the average or center, becoming more diverse in the true sense of the word, more different. This, too, is in accord with both common-sense observation and the laws of evolution, which posit racial divergence and separation as one of the very engines of Life itself.

Another multiracialist word-trick is this argument — the multiracialists tell us repeatedly that: “Differences within races are greater than the differences between races, therefore race is a useless concept.” Sometimes they use that argument referring to genetic difference, sometimes in reference to other racial differences. But the line is always essentially the same — “Differences within races are greater than the differences between races, therefore race means nothing.”

Like the line about legs I spoke about before, this is superficially persuasive — until you apply some critical reasoning. It’s a word-trick.

Let’s look at it critically. First let’s look at a chart of one racial characteristic, White intelligence versus Black intelligence, as shown in the following chart, which you can download and view at What you see is the bell curve distribution of Black intelligence superimposed on the bell curve for White intelligence. The White curve is, on average, more than 15 points higher than the Black, and there is a considerable area of overlap.


The bell curves describing the distribution of IQ (and also other characteristics) within each race do overlap. And it is true, as the multiracialists say, that the distance from one extreme to the other on each curve is often greater than the average distance between the curves.

So, since the bell curve describing White IQ goes from, say 50 on the extreme low end, to say 150 on the extreme high end; and since the Black IQ curve is only 15 or 20 points below the White curve on average; it is therefore true to say that the maximum difference possible between White IQs (100 points) is much greater than the average difference between Blacks and Whites (15 points).

But that statement is quite deceptive, unless you at the same time relate that living in a Black society — which would have a tiny fraction of the geniuses, and many times more borderline morons — is vastly different from living in a White society.

The same statement (that the range of all differences is greater than the average differences between the groups being compared) can be said of most racial differences, or even species differences.

The range in blossom color and shape among all roses may be greater than the average differences in the same characters between roses and violets. But that does not mean that roses are violets.

The range of physical characteristics among all men is far greater than the average physical differences between men and women — but that does not mean that men are women, or that sex does not exist.

The range in size and shape among office buildings is far greater than the average differences between office buildings and houses — but that does not mean that we cannot distinguish between houses and office buildings or that they are the same thing.

Can you see how you’ve been tricked for years — how you’ve been deceived?

Look again at the IQ graph. As writer Alpin MacLaren put it recently:

‘Note that the absolute number of Blacks who have an IQ above the average IQ of Whites is minuscule. If you looked at the dark portion of the graph as if it were a mountain, which represents the entire Black population, you would climb all the way up one side, go over the top, and come nearly all the way down the other side before you finally reached the small section that is of above average intelligence. When you get up to the part of the graph showing the IQ level of 120, which is the average IQ of doctors, you see that the number of Blacks who have that IQ is extremely small. And remember, this graph is adjusted to show the Black and White populations as being equal in size — so you can see that the absolute number of those Blacks with an IQ of 120 or above is vanishingly small. If you compare the graphs you will see that the percentage of Whites who are over the 120 level, is about the same as the percentage of Blacks over the 100 level. At every point above the point of average intelligence for Whites (100), you can see that the Whites far outnumber the Blacks, both absolutely and relative to their percentage of total population. It is important that we understand this as we continue. For a randomly chosen group of Blacks, 75% to 80% of them will have below average intelligence. Half of them will have an IQ that is below 80!’ (emphasis added)

As I said, this has a profound effect on the kind of society each group will build. When you have a tiny fraction of the geniuses, and many times more borderline morons compared to White society, your society will be far more dysfunctional, far less able to cope with environmental and social problems, far less competent in defending itself, far more violent, far more criminal, far more diseased, and far more cruel and dictatorial than the all-White society to which you are comparing it. Tiny genetic differences, and small percentage differences in average intelligence, make for gigantic differences in the way people live — and die.

Denying the obvious is a favorite recreation of cranks like flat-Earthers and multiracialists, and the “there is no difference between the races” lunacy fully qualifies for a room, if not an entire storey, in Kook Manor.

Not too many years ago, the “equality” votaries were claiming that not only were the races genetically different, but they were different enough so that interracial crossings invariably produced what is called “hybrid vigor.” Now they claim that the “hybrids” weren’t hybrids at all since “race does not exist” and, in their own words, “the genetic differences between individuals are greater than those between ‘races.'”

The fact that their successive positions are absolutely contradictory does not even embarrass them. Perhaps, like some religious zealots, they do not even notice the paradox and, even if they did, would dismiss it since reason and logic are irrelevant when one is fighting for “moral good,” as many of the “equality” believers sincerely (though stupidly) believe themselves to be doing.

Every species, plant and animal, that exists or has ever existed on this planet has evolved through racial variation. Therefore it is abundantly evident that races exist. Every case of speciation necessarily begins with very small variations, some barely noticeable, which eventually become more numerous and/or pronounced with the passage of many generations, until a new race is produced. Over time, racial differences increase and a new species may be born. Without such racial variation, speciation and therefore evolution itself could never have happened.

This certainly applies to us humans, who are no more exempt from the natural laws of evolution, which necessarily include race-formation, than we are from the natural laws which guarantee that a fall from 10,000 feet onto hard rock will occur at a certain velocity and will certainly be fatal. These laws of racial divergence and speciation would be true even if humans did not exist and no one had ever bothered to ponder where the subspecies boundaries lie (a necessarily arbitrary point on what is really a continuum). These laws of racial divergence and speciation would be true even if no one had ever thought of the concept or the words “race” and “subspecies.”

We White men and women are one of Nature’s races. We are a unique people. If we do not heed the maxim of self-determination — if we do not throw off the mental shackles imposed on us by those who created the word-tricks of the multiracialists — if we do not make our own survival our highest priority as individuals and as a society — we shall surely perish from the Earth.

* * *

Source: American Dissident Voices broadcast for January 22, 2006

Previous post

Classic Audio -- The Lesson of Africa

Next post

The World's Greatest Hoax

Notify of
Inline Feedback
View all comments
Brown Person
Brown Person
12 May, 2016 5:32 pm

You have the same illogical argument that you claim to be fighting in this clearly pointless, racist and bigoted article.

What do you do for a living? Do you contribute to humanity in any real way? Is this your pathetic attempt at validating your pointless existence? What exactly do you think you have achieved through this article?

More concretely: Have you gotten tested under criterion that are fair and not designed by people who look at the world in a particular way?

13 May, 2016 2:34 pm

What exactly do you think YOU have achieved with your inconsequential questions and statements? Do you assume that only those with a job, and those who have contributed to “humanity”, are somehow the only ones capable of making legitimate points and observations? Just because this article doesn’t pander to your emotionally driven delusions of racial equality doesn’t make it pointless. Also, it sounds like you’re trying to imply that Western science is skewed to prop up White supremacist views. Well, if that’s the case, then please explain how East Asians are shown, within Western scientific institutions, to score higher in certain areas than Whites in I.Q. tests. Western science these days is in fact thoroughly anti-White! Hence all the courses on “White Privilege”, and the insidious weaponization of White history,… Read more »

darius abtin
darius abtin
2 June, 2018 7:24 am

I’m really sorry but I have asked this question several times yet for some reason people have ignored me. How realistic are the Cavalli Sforza charts? It’s placed Iranians with Italians-what did the third reich geneticists think of Iranians. Did Cavalli sforza work for third reich. Because if you refer to Hitlers book mein kampf-especially chapter 11 he refers to the fact that in order for a race to be classed as fully civilised it needs a sense of boundary and structure. where do we draw the line on what is and isnt aryan. What did the nazis think of Iranians-and would have they agreed with cavalli sforza’s books. I feel this question has more relevance than a lot of the other questions that get answered on nv e.g. how… Read more »

Reply to  darius abtin
25 January, 2021 3:09 pm

Greetings Darius. See:
What did Hitler think about Iranians (Persians)? – Quora
“Hitler had always been convinced by the fact that the German and Iranian people share a common ancestry. Iranians inside Germany were immune to the Nurnberg Laws because they were pure-blood Aryans according to their racial theory.”