Mixed-race predator sentenced to life (14 years) for murdering white boy

(Note: this entry includes a discussion of the causes of moral nihilism in society.)

In a suburban London baker’s shop last May, 16 year old Jimmy Mizen was murdered by 19 year old Jake Fahri who smashed a heavy glass bakery dish into Jimmy’s face with such force it severed his jugular vein and his carotid artery and he bled to death.

The killer of Jimmy Mizen and Jimmy Mizen

An excellent thing about the Mail that puts it above any U.S. paper and probably any British paper is the detail with which it recounts violent crimes, as it does here, giving a full picture not only of Jimmy’s murder but of the history of the killer’s interactions with the Mizen family preceding the murder and the effect of the murder on the family. The Mail takes murder seriously, as it ought to be taken. A notable and disturbing exception was the Mail’s vague, minimal coverage of the beheading of Patrick McGee last December in Manchester. Also, while the Mail and other British media have given a lot of coverage to the Jimmy Mizen murder, they have been completely silent about the racial aspect of the murder, a white killed by a mixed-race thug.

Some readers are offended by, or think I needlessly marginalize myself by, the racial specificity with which I speak of the murder of whites by nonwhites. I remind them, as I wrote in the collection of VFR articles on racial murder, that wanton nonwhite violence against whites is not only a very bad thing in itself that has increased from virtually zero a half century ago to an unending, low-level intifida today, an intifada totally ignored by mainstream media; it is where the rubber meets the road on the path to national and civilizational suicide. I will continue to give it the attention it deserves.

(If you wonder why, given the above photo of Fahri, I call him mixed race, see the Mail’s photo of him at age seven.)

- end of initial entry -

Roland D. writes:

You wrote:

“If you wonder why, given the above photo of Fahri, I call him mixed race, see the Mail’s photo of him at age seven.”

What stands out for me isn’t race, but the lack of affect exhibited by the killer. You could edit his photo to change his skin to pale white, his eyes to blue, and his hair color to blonde, and show me this picture without telling me he was a murderer, and I would find the emptiness in his demeanor both chilling and unspeakably sad.

We are raising successive generations of young sociopaths, with no connection whatsoever with the surrounding society and no ability to empathize with others, or to view them as anything other than prey to be exploited whenever and however possible. While this phenomenon is most apparent amongst the lower-income minorities who commit violent physical crimes against one another and against victims of other races and economic brackets, I also see it translated into a nonviolent, yet even more insidious form in middle-class and upper-middle class suburbia, where compassion and any feelings of community, social obligations, and even common courtesy have all gone by the wayside in the parents’ generation, much less amongst their children.

By showing respect and consideration towards others, we gain the currency of self-respect and pride of person; as coarse, unthinking, and selfish behavior towards others becomes the norm, we lose all vestiges of dignity, expressing our shame and self-degradation by denigrating and dehumanizing others. While these pathologies are dramatically more pronounced in minority subcultures, they’re slowly but steadily becoming the aspirational norm amongst our young, as evidenced by the otherwise absurd embrasure of rap music and ghettospeak by white, middle- and upper-middle-class suburban teenagers and twentysomethings.

LA replies:

You write:

What stands out for me isn’t race, but the lack of affect exhibited by the killer. You could edit his photo to change his skin to pale white, his eyes to blue, and his hair color to blonde, and show me this picture without telling me he was a murderer, and I would find the emptiness in his demeanor both chilling and unspeakably sad.

But, as you yourself acknowledge later in your comment, there is a very high correlation between that kind of lack of affect and blackness. While there are, as you also point out, an increasing number of white savages, it would be very difficult to find a blond, blue-eyed person exhibiting the total lack of affect that is typical among blacks and particularly black criminals (who are a very high percentage of the black population).

Hannon writes:

I was struck by Roland D.’s comment overall and what it signifies, to me, about the current state of culture in the West.

He says “as coarse, unthinking, and selfish behavior towards others becomes the norm, we lose all vestiges of dignity, expressing our shame and self-degradation by denigrating and dehumanizing others.”

What does that mean, “becomes the norm”? It seems to mean that we are losing the ability to resist the degradation of our society and its members at large from outside forces. Did we have to worry about “resisting” any such duress a few generations ago? This goes for excessive or unqualified or illegal immigration, Islamization, and attitudes toward crime of all types. We no longer possess the means or the will to say “No” consistently, even to the smallest incursions, and our elected representatives reflect this perfectly.

At the same time that the “bad things” exert their force with increasing ease, becoming ingrained as the memory of better-knowing generations dies out, the “good things” disappear commensurately. It is the vacuum effect that you and others have spoken about at length. By allowing standards to liberalize (fall) we de facto ensure that lesser standards, or an absence of standards, will inevitably take their place.

This process is accelerated by unrestricted, indiscriminate immigration. Once we have significant numbers of Third World refugees (and they are all refugees) living among us, it is all too easy for impressionable, susceptible young people to observe and accept a lower way of living and to see this as “cool” or as an effective way to rebel against parents and society. Immigrants bring us things to be grateful for but they also bring us new ways of thinking about living that propagate our basest demeanor.

LA replies:

I think you may be overstating the role of non-European immigration in the degradation of standards. It is true that de-Europeanization delegitimizes the former cultural identity and national identity of the society, and thus has a large effect in delegitimizing the former moral standards of society as well, but I don’t think that de-Europeanization as such is the major factor in the growth of the kind of extreme nihilism that we’re talking about. I would say that it is one factor in the following complex of factors:

• Civil rights movement (not all of it, but major parts of it)
  
• racial equality and non-discrimination as the dominant idea of society
  
• white guilt
  
• liberation and empowerment of blacks
  
• mass non-European immigration and the browning of America
  
• sexual liberation
  
• women’s liberation and empowerment
  
• radical personal liberation

These things working together have brought about the wholesale destruction of standards.

Also, the main effect of non-European immigration in this process is indirect rather than direct. It is not, at least primarily, something that the immigrants themselves are doing to us; it is the inevitable response of the white majority to the stunning changes of society brought by the immigration. Whites learn that their role is to practice non-discrimination (which is now the ruling value of society) and to adjust to the ongoing transformation of America, not to uphold inherited and normative standards.

[Hannon has revised this comment.]

Hannon writes:

I would agree with your general theme here—I was trying to stay on topic for once! Your last sentence is especially cogent.

However, I am increasingly skeptical of the “benign” nature of the effect of non-European immigration in the U.S. We are led to believe that e.g. Mexicans and Central Americans are largely here to work hard in the promised land and do well for themselves and their families. I believe this is a general truism, but I just read a story about the methamphetamine trade and how it got to be such a huge problem. According to this story, meth was barely a blip on the radar screens of law enforcement c. 1991. Then it exploded, thanks to highly organized Mexican drug gangs who planned and controlled distribution and production across the U.S.

In other words, it is an ongoing tactical invasion, a deliberate marketing offense against American citizens. Our vulnerability or susceptibility (poverty, youth, etc.) is no dodge for the producers or law-makers. I was infuriated when I read this. It made me think of the idiotic argument that we should “stop blaming Mexico for our problem” and similar drivel. We are not without culpability, but in the case of drugs I think we are under assault by a hostile, well-organized and extremely well-funded enemy. We should treat them as such but we do not.

This is only one aspect of what you note is a multi-dimensional issue. We know that modern liberalism underlies most of these problems, but we cannot wage an effective war against “modern liberalism.”

LA writes:

The London Times covers the background of the murderer Jake Fahri:

Born in Greenwich, Jake Lewis Fahri is the son of Mustafa Fahri, a Turkish heating engineer, and Shirley Bevis, an English receptionist. He has a younger sister, Molly.

In the photo I copied from the Mail at the top of this entry, he doesn’t look half English, half Turkish; he looks Negro or half Negro. But what he lacked in genetic inheritance he made up by emulating gangsta rappers. According to the Time, he has demonstrated bullying, violent tendencies since childhood.

Why did Britain, a white country for the last 4,000 years, start admitting millions of nonwhite, non-European people? Why? Why did they admit these aliens, and, above all, Muslim aliens? Why? If Britain had not done that, Jimmy Mizen would still be alive.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at March 28, 2009 02:55 PM | Send