Louise Mensch’s humiliation is not funny.

The following video is of former British MP and now journalist Louise Mensch’s disastrous interview with Andrew Neil on Sunday Politics.  Ostensibly it concerns Mensch’s allegations concerning Trump and Russia but the reality is much deeper and disturbing than that.

Mensch: “If I report something and I say that this happened then I am making an assertion. If I describe a belief then I am describing a belief.

Neil: “If you want to be a journalist beliefs have to be backed up with some evidence.”

Long and uncomfortable pause.

Mensch: “Really? What … do you have a faith?”

Mensch goes on to describe herself as a literal superpower, (as in nation I presume), which Neil is rather flabbergasted about. It would be easy to dismiss Mensch as just another crazy but that is an easy way out of really examining just what is at play here. Because she is not crazy at all. Crazy people look and act a lot different than this as any of you who have watched the Pink Panther movies can attest.

No, Mensch is not crazy. What she is is a victim, and in a world overflowing with victim-hood that is a big call for me to make. I have no desire to add to the bottomless pit of victims out there but when I see a real victim then I have to say something.

This woman is a prime example of our culture’s terrible folly of abandoning the Church and God. People in general need to believe and if you don’t give them some form of guidance then second rate minds will believe in just about anything. Mensch’s belief is that Trump colluded with Russia. It is a real belief – it is in fact her faith as she asserts so painfully. Her role as a journalist has thus been subverted to one of doing anything possible to try and prove her belief in this matter.

This is because it is her faith. Her ego is invested in this outcome. She lives and breathes this every day and she spells out her belief on social media. In her own mind she is able to disassociate between her belief and facts but her actions betray otherwise.  It only takes a few prescient questions from someone like Andrew Neil to reveal the absurdity of her position, an absurdity that she clings to despite all evidence to the contrary.

A key point to consider is that Mensch has only had this belief for a few months at best. What consumed her before this? Steerpike at The Spectator has been tracking her progress for some time.

In fairness, regular Steerpike readers will have already come to this conclusion. From suggesting that Theodor Herzl — the father of modern Zionism and author of The Jewish State — was an anti-Semite to tweeting that Charlie Hebdo was a person, it’s best to treat anything Mensch emits on social media with severe caution.

In a few months Mensch will believe in something else and on it will go. Crazy? No. Tormented? Most certainly. She believes in anything because she needs to believe in something. This type of person would have been relatively happy in the bosom of the Church. With a clear faith to guide her she would not have the gaping chasm that so obviously exists within her being.

There are millions like her adrift in the world. We mock her but by doing so we mock ourselves. Our mockery reveals the degeneration of our own culture that would abandon people like this and then humiliate them in the process. By mocking her we feel superior but just how superior are we? In truth she makes us feel uncomfortable because she displays our own weaknesses so prominently. We can substitute all manner of beliefs for those of Mensch. Climate change, diversity, equality, gender awareness, racism, the patriarchy, misogyny, feminism, open borders, the list goes on and on.

The list is so endless because of the fact that our culture has lost its faith. You are your culture. You are not above this. If you think you’re above this then what culture do you belong to exactly? You can’t have it both ways. We are all responsible for the Louise Mensch’s of the world. So stop laughing because it’s getting to the point where it’s not funny anymore.

 

11 thoughts on “Louise Mensch’s humiliation is not funny.

  1. MarkT

    You had me until about the middle of this article. The choice is not between the faith of the Left versus the faith of the Right – but between reason (ideas founded on reality) versus faith (those that aren’t).

    Like

      1. MarkT

        No, I’m pointing out the similarities in fundamental thinking method between Mensch/ leftists on the one hand, and religion at its worst on the other – both substituting blind belief in something (faith) for reason.

        My starting point is to ask what is required for human flourishing, from that comes the need for reason and free-thought, from which comes the need for individual freedom and a state to protect those freedoms. The key point being that the state is secondary, and only a positive insofar as it protects reason and freedom. That’s the spirit of the Enlightenment that made the West great.

        Implicitly, you seem to accept the primacy of human flourishing, and the importance of reason in the majority of what you write. When it comes to politics though, you seem to regard the strong nation-state/ church as the starting point. The problem with that is the state/church can be either pro or anti Enlightenment, and it can either protect or destroy freedom. Yes, there’s some tradition in the West of the church being a protector, but only because it was forced into some accommodation with the Enlightenment values I’ve described.

        Like

      2. Your mistake is assuming that virtue exists in humans in general. That it comes from within. While that is true of individuals it is not true of the greater mass. Our present societal problems reflect that. You are promoting enlightenment values as being more important than societal ones. I question whether enlightenment values can even exist in the first place without a strong nation/church to promote them. In what other context in human history have they ever arisen?

        Like

      3. MarkT

        If you mean by this that most need guidance from a moral code rather than having to work it out for themselves, I agree. But I think your mistake is in thinking you can’t have that without it being founded on faith. Look to writers like Ayn Rand if you want a morality founded on reason, and it’s far superior. If people like you and me can’t explain the basis in reality for any moral standard, then we have to question it. Just deferring to some authority (whether that authority be the church, some PC narrative, or even Ayn Rand) is not good enough. Hence my challenge to you over gay marriage.

        Aside from that, I think you over-estimate how much the church is a foundation of Western values. When they launched their inquisition into Galileo and other free thinkers they were the enemy of those values. I see Mensch and other leftists as the modern day equivalent of the inquisition. You also seem to disregard the common ground shared by the church and socialism. Look to the incoherencies coming from your current Pope for evidence of that.

        Like

      4. The Church is under the process of being subjugated like every other public institution – the pope has just recited from the Koran in the Vatican. It has also had its fair share of historical battles, both internal and external. That those battles have been fought is the reason for its continued existence.

        I have been working out a post in my head for some time regarding the questions that you are posing regarding morality. I will have it up soon.

        Like

  2. Darwinian Arminian

    She believes in anything because she needs to believe in something. This type of person would have been relatively happy in the bosom of the Church. With a clear faith to guide her she would not have the gaping chasm that so obviously exists within her being.

    That there is all the more reason why we should be laughing. You said it yourself: Louise Mensch keeps no church and no God. Instead, she puts her faith in the idea that Trump is secretly a Russian agent. Or in the notion that Evan McMullin would make a great president. Or in feminism. In the old days those were what we would have called false gods. And how should we respond to false gods? We should mock them. Like Elijah with the Baal worshippers at Mount Carmel. It’s Biblical!

    Don’t look at the laughter directed her way as a smug sign of moral superiority. See it instead as a corrective. “Point and Laugh” has been a social method for identifying foolishness and misbehavior throughout human history — often to great effect. In this case, it can serve the purpose of nudging Louise Mensch to reject and discard her false belief. Or it can give the signal that her claims are, in fact, ridiculous to others who might be tempted to believe them. And should neither of those outcomes actually come to pass then we can satisfy ourselves in the knowledge that with our laughter, we have at least testified to the truth.

    I suppose another option might be to say nothing at all, or act as if what she’d said was somewhere within the realms of plausibility — or respect. But if you choose that, how can you then go on to complain about the way your culture keeps venerating ludicrous ideas as if they were holy writ? Ridicule has always been used as a worthy response to the fool. Solomon was not above this. Neither was Christ. There’s no reason why we should be.

    Like

  3. Absent

    The Christian faith is based on reason and holds reason to be an important virtue. Part of the reason for Jesus’ miracles was that he did not expect people to believe his words without evidence. Skepticism is valued and superstition devalued throughout the Bible. This value system is what made the Scientific Revolution possible in Western Europe and gave us the reverence for logic and evidence-based argument that underpins Western thought.

    We’re already starting to see what happens when you pull the foundation of Christian faith out from under the feet of a culture whose values and thought processes derived from it. It’s going to get scarier.

    Like

  4. Dave

    Lol I love how you try so hard to give a complex diagnosis to this woman’s problem. She is simply batshit crazy and there is nothing more to it than that.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s