Multiracialists are Crazy, Part 2
Racial self-determination is the sane way to organize society; multiracialism is insane and extremely dangerous.
American Dissident Voices broadcast for January 15, 2006
by Kevin Alfred Strom
WHAT IS A MULTIRACIALIST? He's crazy -- I told you that last week.
And he's genocidal. Multiracialists believe that we should incorporate
many races into our society, all under one government. Let's take a
brief look at just how crazy that is.
On New Year's Day, in broad daylight in an old, established
neighborhood in Richmond, Virginia, we found out about that kind of
crazy. Dead crazy. Killing crazy. On that day a White family -- rock
musician Bryan Harvey and his wife, toy store owner Kathryn Harvey, and
their two little girls Stella, 9, and Ruby, 4 -- were getting ready for
an afternoon party. They were last seen alive by a friend at 10 AM. By
1:40 PM they were all dead.
According to police, two Blacks, Ray Dandridge and Ricky Gray,
entered the Harvey home, while a third Black, Ashley Baskerville, may
have served as a lookout on the street. Dandridge and Gray overpowered
the Harveys, bound them, tortured and beat them with blunt objects,
then methodically slit all of their throats -- and set their house on
fire to destroy the evidence of their deeds. The Harveys, including
their little girls, were obviously innocent of any offense against
their killers -- the motive was probably robbery according to reports
-- but the savage and bestial nature of the criminals led them
inexorably to their acts. They are suspected of a string of similar
killings. We will never know to what extent, if any, the "hate Whitey"
attitude prevailing in the media fueled the rage of the killers, but we
do know that Bryan Harvey's evocation of White racial guilt in one of
his songs -- "White Folks' Blood" -- didn't help him or his wife or
children when the animals got out their knives.
[ http://tinyurl.com/ex4ej ]
* * * * * *
(ILLUSTRATION: Top: Richmond, Virginia's Harvey family -- brutally
murdered on New Year's Day -- Ruby, 4, Stella, 9, Kathryn, 39, and
Bryan, 49. Bottom: Ray Dandridge and Ricky Gray, arrested for the
Harvey murders and a string of other killings.)
FBI and local
crime statistics show beyond doubt that Blacks are far less
disciplined, far more violent, and far more criminal than Whites. No
matter how differently the 5 per cent. or so of accomplished, educated
Blacks and mixed-race Mulattos may act, the research report The Color of Crime reveals that on average "Blacks are seven times more likely than people
of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit
robbery." Mestizos commit violent crimes at three times the White rate.
"Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year
involving Blacks and Whites, Blacks commit 85 per cent. and Whites
commit 15 per cent. ...Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to
commit a violent crime against a White than vice versa, and 136 times
more likely to commit robbery." The proportion of Blacks and Mestizos in an area is, statistically, the single best indicator of how dangerous it is.
[ http://nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=7388 ]
It is the quasi-religious and pathological belief system of
multiracialism -- the ideology that says that monsters like Dandridge
and Gray should have free access to the neighborhoods and schools of
Stella and Ruby and Kathryn and Bryan Harvey -- that is ultimately
responsible for this crime.
[ http://tinyurl.com/cfwg8 ]
[ http://tinyurl.com/8gmhk ]
So, again I ask: What is a multiracialist? He's a person who
believes that it is wise and good to have multiple races in our
society, all living together under the same government. Multiracialists
believe in the opposite of the maxim of self-determination: "Every people that considers itself to be a people should, to the maximum extent possible, live under its own
government." To rephrase that maxim to fit their beliefs, it would read
something like "All peoples, regardless of race or culture, should be
able to come and live under our democratic government."
You'll notice I didn't say "should be able to come and live under any democratic government." I said our government. That's because multiracialists are inconsistent. That's to
be expected, because multiracialism is not a well-thought-out
philosophy. It's less of a philosophy than it is a kind of crazy
religion. And it is less of a religion than it is a pathology, a mental
A multiracialist may claim to believe that all nations should open themselves up to unlimited immigration and racial mixing
(which is roughly the same as an individual "opening himself up" by
leaning back, making a sizable incision across his chest with a
machete, and letting any creatures large or small that happen by have
at his blood and internal organs in any way they want, including living
inside them and feeding on them).
But the multiracialist really doesn't think that "all nations" should open themselves up that way. No. He thinks that only White nations should open themselves up like that. You never hear multiracialists
demanding that Japan or Korea or China open themselves up to mass
immigration of Whites. Japanese racial-nationalism is real -- Japan is
virtually 100 per cent. Japanese -- but you almost never hear this
discussed as a "problem" in the controlled media, unlike the
"emergency" that White-ruled South Africa constituted. You never hear a
demand for Africa to open up its wide fields and magnificent mountains
for the settlement of White people. You almost never hear
multiracialists calling for Israel to let in more Blacks.
No, the multiracialists demand open borders and "racial diversity"
only for White nations. America must become more non-White -- Europe
and Australia must become more non-White. That is their demand.
Only in traditionally White nations is it an "evil" bordering on an
emergency when the native-born population wants to maintain its
integrity. Australians wanting White cities and White beaches: total
evil. Japanese wanting a Japanese nation: just fine. Germans wanting to
stay German: a racist abomination. Israel wanting to remain a Jewish
state: A-OK. White Americans wanting to preserve their heritage and
culture, and organizing to do so: racism and hate. Africans wanting to
preserve their heritage and culture, and organizing to do so: laudable
As columnist and wit Bob Whitaker says, the multiracialists may
claim that racial mixing is the "solution to the race problem," but
that's not what they really mean at all. What they really want, and
what they're really working for, is a "solution to the White problem."
Because, truth be told, everything they do is designed to exterminate
us. The true-believing multiracialists, those who have accepted
multiracialism as a kind of religion, have been in essence driven
insane to the point where they are working to kill their own people.
But those who crafted this anti-survival belief system, in my opinion,
knew exactly what they were doing.
Multiracialists claim that culture -- which is learned, they say --
means everything and genes -- which are inherited -- mean nothing. But
they are wrong -- genes determine all human potential, including
Genes determine the structure of our brains, and our brains
determine our behavior (including that of the culture-bearing stratum,
if any, in a given race), and there are racial differences in all these
The Culture of the West could not have arisen without the European
race, any more than wasp's nests can arise spontaneously without wasps.
(The environment is secondary, not primary, as a factor in culture
and behavior. If you eliminate the alluvial deposits nearby a colony of
mud-dauber wasps, it may be that the mud-daubers' nests will then be of
inferior or at least a different quality. However, if you eliminate the
mud-daubers themselves, there will definitely be no mud-daubers' nests.
If one hypothetically eliminated all non-White contributions to our
civilization, it would still exist and still be recognizable. But if
one eliminated all the contributions of Whites to Western civilization,
one would for all practical purposes eliminate the whole of it, and
certainly all of its distinctive characteristics.
If Europeans were placed in Africa to fend for themselves, wouldn't
that be a demonstration of the relative effects of genetic structure on
culture, versus the effects of environment? And such a test has in fact
been done. In South Africa and Rhodesia and elsewhere we have examples
of European man, sometimes largely the cast-offs and most poorly
educated part of their societies, building magnificent nations hardly
distinguishable from their European homes in just a few generations.
Give the Liberians New York City entirely for themselves and I
suspect that trees would be growing up through the pavement of Wall
Street in less than a century; give Liberia to European man and in the
same amount of time great universities and spaceports would rise in the
plains and valleys of Nimba and Lofa.
Would the Europeans in Africa produce exactly the same
things they would have produced if they had stayed in Stockholm or Rome
or Moscow? No. But they would express their characteristic mentalities
and personalities in such ways as the new environment demanded or
permitted, becoming a new and distinct nation -- but still part of the
European cultural and racial family, which is recognized as a unity by
everyone except desiccated Western "intellectuals" and their
If Africans were in every way the equivalent of Whites, would we
not find the great writers and artists of Africa -- or the African
diaspora -- standing shoulder to shoulder with the great Europeans?
Surely, with multiracialists eager to promote "equality" at all costs,
the names of this unmined vein of new Poes and Vergils and Homers from
Uganda -- or "the hood" -- would be shouted from the housetops and on
every TV channel 24 hours per day.
In these politically correct times, anyone finding them would get a
PBS spot with Bill Moyers and an Inaugural reading upon the inevitable
coronation of Hillary Clinton. But alas, the best they can give us is
Langston Hughes and Maya Angelou and other fourth-raters.
Multiracialists might object to what I have said, and point out
that cultures do change, even while the gene pool remains substantially
the same. So how can genes determine culture?
A stone-building culture will change, of course, if the people run
out of stones. A whale-oil-burning culture will change if all the
whales are killed. An asteroid collision with the Earth would certainly
change our culture. That's elementary.
Equally elementary is the fact that a race, placed by Nature on a
rich and gigantic continent, which in the course of its entire
existence and in all of its innumerable tribes and peoples and nations,
never independently created a written language is significantly
different genetically from the race which -- in the same amount of time
-- produced Dante and the Parthenon and the Saturn V rocket. The gene
pools of some races produce brighter and more creative people, on
average, than others. More discoveries are made in the cultures of such
creative peoples. When the whale oil runs out, or the ice sheet
expands, they can adapt more readily than others, too.
"Culture" is merely a name we give to the things that some groups
of human beings do. Human beings behave as they do because of the
structure of their brains. Unless there has been a serious injury or
illness, that brain structure is determined by genetic inheritance.
Mixing will not mean one homogeneous mixed race -- far more likely
is an India-like scenario, with a multiplicity of new types and
subtypes, with all the associated hostilities and conflicts of a
bi-racial society multiplied by ten. That's not a future I'd wish upon
Furthermore, even wholesale mixing will not end the processes of
racial divergence and speciation. It may set them back 100,000 years
(and, in the process, extinguish forever the hope that Life will
transcend the bonds of Earth), but they cannot be stopped.
Like storm-clouds building into thunderheads, race-formation is always on the horizon, always happening.
So the enforced multiracialism that now prevails in the former West
is not only cruel, genocidal, and destructive -- but since it must fail
in its goals, it is also pointless.
Multiracialists don't think much of borders, but in their insanity
they do give borders some magical qualities. They believe that merely
arriving on our side of the U.S. border makes on an American, for
example. I am sorry to interrupt their dream, but "arriving" anywhere
does not make one a member of the people currently residing there --
who, by sharing a language, history, sense of community, and blood
relationship constitute a nation.
Nations are biological entities; they are groups of living people.
They are also movable and not necessarily fixed in one location or
territory, though they obviously need territory to survive.
It is the loony equality crowd who claim that mere residence (or
residence combined with a few legal formalities and hand-waving) makes
one an instant member of the nation.
It would make about as much sense to claim that a Volkswagen
becomes a Fiat when it crosses the Alps, or that a Jackson Pollock
painting becomes art when it is placed in a gallery, or that an
intruder becomes a member of the family he is robbing and raping and
killing because he's in their house.
The achievement of American greatness occurred when America was
about 90 per cent. White; when Whites controlled virtually every level
of government, virtually all media of entertainment, education, and
culture, and virtually all businesses. Imposing American culture on
Blacks and other non-Whites -- with very limited success, I might add
-- did not result in equivalent greatness among those races.
France is indubitably a great nation. But the imposition of French
culture on North Africans did not result in a new or greater France.
The imposition of French culture on Indochina did not result in a new
France, or anything even remotely similar. It might be interesting to
compare the achievements of French Polynesia with those of France.
Culture is secondary. Race is paramount.
The European race has proven again and again and again that it has
the requisite mental equipment to found, maintain, and advance a high
civilization. Brand X cannot make this claim, even when advanced
civilization is handed to them on a platter.
Multiracialism cannot succeed in its goal of eradicating racial
divisions and the racial divergence that is an inherent part of
evolution. Multiracialism cannot bring about a race-blind society.
Multiracialism cannot create human "equality," which is an utter
delusion which will never exist.
But multiracialism can destroy our culture. It can prevent us from
advancing and ever reaching the stars. It can exterminate our race. It
can kill little children like Ruby and Stella Harvey. National Vanguard
is an organization that is determined to prevent tragedies like that.
Please -- join us today.
We need your support. You can join or donate by writing to our
postal address below, or you can also donate through Paypal by sending
We can have a clean, orderly, progressive, safe, and incomparably richer and more beautiful nation if it becomes a proud White nation again.
To do that we must begin by restoring White community and White
racial consciousness among our people. We at National Vanguard are
doing that by building world-beating new media for Whites and by
getting out on the street and meeting our neighbors and showing them
what we're all about.
We're going to help our people. We're going to educate our people.
We're going to come up with creative ways to awaken our people. We're
going to create publications that will be like nothing ever seen before
in the cause of White awakening. We're going to do what it takes.
Be a part of what we're doing. Join National Vanguard today. For
further information on National Vanguard, write to Post Office Box
5145, Charlottesville VA 22905, or visit http://www.nationalvanguard.org/ and click on the "join" link at the top of the page. We appreciate your support.
Until next week, this is Kevin Alfred Strom reminding you of the
words of Richard Berkeley Cotten: Freedom is not free; free men are not
equal; and equal men are not free.
Source: National Vanguard