The George Floyd Case: Cowardice & Tribalism

Allegations of the film The Fall of Minneapolis

2023-12-19, Withdrawn 2024-02-26

I have decided to withdraw this blog because it was insufficiently critical of the film The Fall of Minneapolis, based on information I recently received. I may decide to revisit this issue in a future blog. In the meantime, here are some relevant links.

Sommaire en français J’ai décidé de retirer ce blogue car il n’était pas suffisamment critique à l’égard du film The Fall of Minneapolis, au vu des informations que j’ai reçues récemment. Je déciderai peut-être de revenir sur cette question dans un prochain blogue. En attendant, voici quelques liens pertinents.

Links


Next blog: Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s Conversion: An Act of Desperation

The Grotesque Naïveté of the “Woke”

2023-10-01

If you believe that “wokism” is a positive and progressive political movement, do you also believe that Islam is a religion of peace?

Sommaire en français Si vous croyez que le « wokisme » est un mouvement politique positif et progressiste, trouvez-vous également que l’islam est une religion de paix ?

There are people who support the anti-Enlightenment pseudo-left (i.e. “wokism”) because they like the word “woke,” because they consider it to have positive connotations, such as being aware of injustices and wanting to end them.

That is like supporting Christianity because many people use the word “Christian” as a synonym for good and kind. It is like supporting the powerful Polish “Law and Justice” party—a right-wing party, very pro-Catholic—because the name includes the word “justice” and we are all in favour of that, aren’t we, in particular social justice?

How dimwitted can a person be?

Has there ever been an elected politician who did not claim to advocate freedom, in one form or another? Does that mean they are all to be trusted as proponents of freedom and are all worthy of our support? Of course not. Many of them—perhaps most—are dissembling. We need to look more closely, of course.

It takes a certain dullness of mind for a person to support a movement simply because it claims to be “woke.” The anti-Enlightenment pseudo-left is a toxic, racist and fanatical cult which has corrupted the political left. It rejects universalism and discredits the left, thus strengthening the political right. It deserves our criticism, not our endorsement.

Toxic Ideologies

The anti-Enlightenment pseudo-left, or more succinctly the post-left, involves a complex mixture of dubious ideologies. The two most important of these are Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Gender Theory.

Critical Race Theory (CRT) is a pseudoscience which holds that:

  • Racial identity is the most important thing about a person. Forget personality, education, personal qualities, quirks and taste. Forget all other personal attributes.
  • Racism is ominipresent, unavoidable and cannot not be present in all situations;
  • Racism occurs only in one direction, i.e. whites are racist towards non-whites. Whites are always racist and non-whites never are.
  • White people cannot understand racism and must remain silent on the issue, always deferring to non-whites.
  • Any disparity between groups, especially racial groups, must be the result of racism or similar injustice. Any other contributing factor is rejected out of hand.

Critical Race Theory is an antiracist ideology in the same way that Islam is a religion of peace.

Like many pseudosciences, religions and ideologies, CRT is non falsifiable. For example, if one believes that racism is always present in any situation, it is a simple matter to label some innocuous behaviour as racist. CRT is a generator of guilt and paranoïa. It is a great boon to the political right, because it allows the right to dismiss the antiracist movement as insane, which it obviously has become since it adopted this ideology. Critical Race Theory is an antiracist ideology in the same way that Islam is a religion of peace.

Gender Theory is a pseudoscience which holds that:

  • Sex is a social construct and thus on a continuum, when in reality sex is a biological reality and it is binary, as the only sexes are male and female.
  • There exists in each individual an innate gender identity which takes precedence over the person’s sex which is considered assigned at birth, whereas only the individual can know their gender identity.

Gender identity is like the Christian soul: an ethereal entity which is unobservable.

Social constructivism is extremely damaging, as it leads to self-identification, so that a man may simply declare himself a woman (or vice versa) and demand access to women-only spaces and events. Lesbians are vilified for rejecting the sexual advances of men who identify as women. Gender identity is like the Christian soul: an ethereal entity which is unobservable. Thus, like CRT, the existence of gender identity is an unfalsifiable hypothesis. To posit its existence is the pretense used to justify applying so-called “sex-change” procedures to minors—puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and sometimes even invasive surgeries including mastectomy and castration. When such procedures are applied to fully consenting adults, there is no problem. However, minors are too young to give informed consent to serious medical interventions whose necessity is very much in doubt.

The Best and the Worst of European Civilization

For the post-left, European culture is irremediably evil.

The Enlightenment is arguably the greatest achievement of European civilization, and that is precisely what the post-left rejects. The post-left is itself a product of European civilization, but it rejects Europeanness utterly, maintaining that everything about it is racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. For the post-left, European culture is irremediably evil. The post-left—a.k.a. “wokism”—is thus arguably the worst possible product of European civilization. At its most extreme, i.e. as promoted by its most pious adherents, the post-left constitutes a masochistic, self-destructive, even suicidal (i.e. culturally suicidal) rejection of one’s own Europeanness—a.k.a. “whiteness.”


Next blog: The Long March of Emotional Blackmail

Quatorze observations à propos de la post-gauche

Aussi connue sous le nom de « wokisme »

2023-09-17
2023-09-18 : deux liens corrigés

La post-gauche, alias le « wokisme », est une infection parasitaire qui est en train de détruire la gauche politique, si ce n’est pas déjà fait.

Summary in English The post-left, a.k.a. “wokism,” is a parasitic infection which is destroying the political left, if it has not done so already. This blog is available in English: Fourteen Observations about Post-Leftism

  1. Le soi-disant « wokisme » est bien réel. Vous pouvez ne pas aimer cette appellation, mais il serait irrationnel de nier l’existence du phénomène. Ce n’est pas une fiction inventée par la droite politique. De nombreuses personnes se revendiquant de la gauche politique se définissaient comme « woke » bien avant que la droite n’entende ce terme.
  2. Le wokisme est un mélange complexe d’idéologies, mais celles-ci ont en commun l’abandon des valeurs des Lumières, en particulier l’universalisme. Les woke se prétendent de gauche mais ont trahi les valeurs mêmes qui définissent la gauche. Je les appelle la pseudo-gauche anti-Lumières ou la post-gauche
  3. Les valeurs des Lumières — la raison, la tolérance, la liberté, le progrès, l’univeralisme, les droits humains et la laïcité — sont grandement acceptées en Occident (du moins,elles l’étaient avant la venue du wokisme). Aujourd’hui même la droite modérée les acceptent. Ainsi, sur certaines questions — comme la laïcité, l’objectivité, la liberté d’expression — la post-gauche se positionne à la droite de plusieurs conservateurs modérés comme Jordan Peterson ou Mathieu Bock-Côté.
  4. Ayant rejeté les Lumières, les post-gauchistes ont peu de respect pour l’objectivité et, par conséquent, sont souvent peu respectueux de la vérité si cela peut faire avancer leur programme. L’un de leurs plus gros mensonges est que le « wokisme » serait une sorte de panique morale inventée par la droite politique. Voir le point (1) ci-dessus. En fait, les critiques à l’égard de la post-gauche émanent de tout le spectre politique, de la gauche, y compris des marxistes, du centre et de la droite.
  5. Bien que les origines philosophiques de la post-gauche incluent d’importantes contributions des philosophes postmodernes français et des post-marxistes allemands, la post-gauche demeure principalement un phénomène américain. C’est aux États-Unis que le postmodernisme a été appliqué pour la première fois à l’activisme politique. Par ailleurs, l’histoire de l’esclavage et du racisme extrême anti-Noirs dans ce pays a conduit à placer les concepts de race et de racisme au centre des préoccupations de la gauche et ensuite de la post-gauche. Cette priorisation du racisme, en particulier du racisme anti-Noirs, est compréhensible et légitime, compte tenu de l’histoire des États-Unis. Cependant, la post-gauche fait un très mauvais travail dans la lutte contre le racisme, même aux États-Unis. Ses effets sont encore pires lorsque ses doctrines sont exportées vers d’autres pays dont l’histoire — en particulier celle du racisme — est très différente de celle des États-Unis. Il faut résister à la post-gauche afin de s’opposer à l’américanisation rampante de tout.
  6. Ainsi, au cœur du wokisme se trouve le néoracisme, une dérive de l’antiracisme, mais qui attise le racisme au lieu de le combattre. Les néoracistes rejettent le principe de daltonisme racial, c’est-à-dire l’indifférence à la couleur de la peau, déclaré par Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK), et promeuvent plutôt une obsession pour l’identité raciale, ainsi que la discrimination positive. Les néoracistes soulignent que MLK lui-même préconisait la discrimination positive (« affirmative action »), ce qui est vrai, mais ils oublient allégrement de mentionner que MLK envisageait celle-ci comme une mesure temporaire — durant peut-être plusieurs décennies — dont le but était de parvenir à un avenir dans lequel ses quatre enfants « ne seraient pas jugés sur la couleur de leur peau mais sur le contenu de leur caractère ». L’objectif des néoracistes, au contraire, est ce qu’on appelle « l’équité », qui exige l’égalité des résultats (pas seulement l’égalité des chances), ce qui signifie que la distribution raciale dans une profession doit correspondre à la distribution raciale dans la population en général. C’est pratiquement impossible à réaliser, même avec l’ingénierie sociale la plus draconienne. Ainsi, dans la pratique, les néoracistes n’ont aucune vision pour l’avenir, mais seulement une obsession pour l’identité raciale ad æternum.
  7. On accuse souvent les post-gauchistes d’être anti-Blancs, même si leur idéologie demeurent bien populaire chez les « Blancs ». L’accusation est certainement valable, mais il faut bien comprendre que cette attitude anti-Blancs des néoracistes provient de leur dénigrement de l’héritage européen, c’est-à-dire les Lumières. Le siècle des Lumières est sans doute la plus grande réussite de la civilisation européenne. En abandonnant les Lumières, la post-gauche diabolise la civilisation européenne et les Européens.
  8. Influencés par le postmodernisme et le relativisme culturel, les post-gauchistes rejettent l’universalisme et voient le monde comme un ensemble de groupes, chacun avec ses propres intérêts et sa propre « vérité », souvent inconciliables avec ceux et celle des autres groupes. Ainsi, les intérêts et sentiments du groupe (réels ou présumés) priment sur l’objectivité, conduisant à une survalorisation de l’émotion et à une censure sociale de propos ou d’images jugés « offensants » à l’égard d’un groupe perçu comme cible d’injustice. Considérons l’exemple d’un professeur d’histoire de l’art dans une université au Minnesota qui a été licencié sur-le-champ pour le péché d’avoir enseigné l’histoire de l’art — en utilisant une image médiévale de Mahomet dans une leçon. Le recteur de l’université a déclaré que « le respect des étudiants musulmans pratiquants dans cette classe aurait dû primer sur la liberté académique ». Il s’agit d’un exemple flagrant de censure sociale (« cancel culture ») motivée par l’idéologie de la post-gauche.
  9. La post-gauche se targue de défendre les minorités contre les injustices, mais en réalité elle y parvient très mal, car sa véritable action consiste à dénigrer les majorités. En outre, elle a tendance à considérer chaque minorité comme monolithique, sans tenir compte des grandes variations qui peuvent survenir au sein de chacune.
  10. À l’époque du colonialisme européen, les Européens se considéraient le centre de l’univers, ayant le devoir de civiliser le reste du monde. Aujourd’hui, la post-gauche continue de placer la civilisation européenne au centre de l’univers, mais ce centre est désormais prétendument pourri, imposant toutes les formes d’oppression à tout le monde. Cette dernière attitude n’est que le revers de la première. Les deux sont eurocentriques. Les deux sont fausses. Les deux sont des extrêmes néfastes. Pour la post-gauche, les Européens (c’est-à-dire les « Blancs ») constituent la mauvaise majorité qui persécute constamment diverses minorités. La persécution dans l’autre sens ou la persécution entre des groupes non blancs (p.ex. la traite esclavagiste arabo-musulmane) est rarement, voire jamais, évoquée par la post-gauche.
  11. Le néoracisme diffère du racisme classique sur un point majeur : tandis que les racistes classiques exagèrent les différences biologiques et tentent ainsi d’établir une hiérarchie de « races », certaines supérieures aux autres, les néoracistes ignorent et nient simplement la dimension biologique. Les néoracistes ne tentent même pas de définir la « race » ou le « racisme » de manière cohérente. Cela leur permet de porter à volonté des accusations de racisme contre leurs adversaires, même dans les contextes les plus inappropriés. Une accusation post-gauchiste de racisme est pratiquement irréfutable — comme une croyance religieuse infalsifiable — parce que les post-gauchistes n’ont aucune définition claire qui puisse être utilisée pour déterminer objectivement ce qui est raciste et ce qui ne l’est pas. Cette habitude atteint son paroxysme lorsque les post-gauchistes racialisent l’appartenance religieuse, amalgamant identité raciale et affiliation religieuse, se donnant ainsi carte blanche pour lancer des accusations de « racisme » contre quiconque critique cette religion.
  12. Les post-gauchistes ont tendance à se prétendre l’incarnation même de la parfaite vertu. Mais parce qu’ils font un travail de mauvaise qualité en défendant les causes traditionnelles de gauche (telles que l’antiracisme, l’égalité hommes-femmes, etc.), et parce qu’ils prétendent avec arrogance être la gauche, la seule gauche (comme si la gauche universaliste n’existait pas), ils font le jeu de la droite politique et de l’extrême droite. Le comportement fanatique et les dogmes fous des post-gauchistes jettent le discrédit sur la gauche, confortant et renforçant ainsi la droite politique. Les gens de droite peignent souvent l’ensemble de la gauche politique avec le pinceau du wokisme afin de discréditer la gauche en général et de donner une meilleure image de la droite.
  13. La mouvance post-gauche n’est pas un parti politique ni un groupe bien circonscrit. Il s’agit plutôt d’une mentalité, d’une idéologie, d’un préjugé dont l’influence s’est répandue dans de nombreuses institutions de la société — gouvernements, universités, groupes militants, médias, etc. — aux États-Unis, au Canada et dans plusieurs pays européens. Différentes personnes affichent divers degrés d’adhésion à cette idéologie. Beaucoup de ceux qui ont, dans une plus ou moins grande mesure, adopté la mentalité post-gauchiste, peut-être même inconsciemment, peuvent ignorer les origines de cette idéologie. Ces questions doivent être débattues publiquement afin que les gens apprennent à résister à l’infection idéologique que représente le post-gauchisme. Le mot « infection » est en effet approprié ici. Le post-gauchisme est une infection parasitaire qui détruit la gauche politique, si ce n’est pas déjà fait.
  14. L’antidote au post-gauchisme, c’est l’universalisme, une valeur fondamentale des Lumières. Au fait, c’est le remède à la fois au racisme et au néoracisme.

Prochain blogue : The Grotesque Naïveté of the “Woke”

Fourteen Observations about Post-Leftism

a.k.a. “Wokism”

2023-01-06

The post-left, a.k.a. “wokism”, is a parasitic infection which is destroying the political left, if it has not done so already.

Sommaire en français La post-gauche, alias le « wokisme », est une infection parasitaire qui est en train de détruire la gauche politique, si ce n’est déjà fait. (Ce blogue est disponible en français : Quatorze observations à propos de la post-gauche.)

  1. So-called “wokism” is real. You are allowed to dislike the label, but you are not allowed to deny the existence of the phenomenon. It is not some fiction invented by the political right. Many people who considered themselves to be on the political left self-defined as “woke” long before the right ever heard of the term.
  2. The mix of ideologies which constitute wokism is complex, but the common underlying doctrine can be identified clearly. The “woke”—although they claim to be on the left—have rejected Enlightenment values, values which constitute the very definition of the political left. Thus, they have betrayed the left. I call them the anti-Enlightenment pseudo-left or the post-left.
  3. Enlightenment values, such as reason, tolerance, freedom, progress, universalism, human rights and secularism, have become widely accepted in Western societies—or were until the recent growth of the post-left. Today even moderate right-wingers generally accept such values. Thus, on some issues—such as secularism, objectivity, freedom of expression—the post-left take positions to the right of moderate conservatives such as Jordan Peterson or Mathieu Bock-Côté.
  4. …criticism of the post-left comes from across the entire political spectrum, from the left, including Marxists, from the centre and from the right.

  5. As post-leftists fail to respect values such as objectivity, they often play fast and loose with the truth if lying will advance their agenda. One of their biggest lies is that “wokism” is some moral panic invented by the political right. See (1) above. In fact, criticism of the post-left comes from across the entire political spectrum, from the left, including Marxists, from the centre and from the right.
  6. Although the philosophical origins of the post-left include important contributions from French postmodernists and German post-Marxists, the post-left is principally an American phenomenon. It was in the USA that postmodernism was first applied to political activism. Furthermore, the history of slavery and extreme anti-black racism in that country has resulted in placing the concepts of race and racism at the centre of the post-left’s preoccupations. This prioritization of racism, especially anti-black racism, is understandable and indeed legitimate given the history of the USA. However, the post-left does a very bad job of fighting racism even in the USA. And its effects are even worse when exported to other countries whose history—in particular the history of racism—is very different from that of the USA. Resisting the post-left is necessary in order to oppose the creeping Americanization of everything.
  7. Neoracists point out that MLK himself advocated affirmative action, which is true, but they conveniently forget to mention that he intended it to be a temporary measure…

  8. At the core of post-left activism is, therefore, neoracism, an ideology which claims to be anti-racist but which does more to inflame racism than to fight it. Neoracists reject the colour-blindness goal famously declared by Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) and instead promote colour-consciousness, i.e. positive discrimination. Neoracists point out that MLK himself advocated affirmative action, which is true, but they conveniently forget to mention that he intended it to be a temporary measure—perhaps several decades—whose purpose was to achieve a colour-blind future in which his four children “will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” The goal of neoracists, on the contrary, is so-called “equity” which requires equality of outcomes (not just equality of opportunity), meaning that the racial mix in a profession must match the racial mix in the general population. This is practically impossible to achieve, even with the most draconian social engineering. So in practice, neoracists propose no conclusion, just an obsession for racial identity ad æternum.
  9. In abandoning the Enlightenment, the post-left demonizes European civilization and Europeans.

  10. Post-leftists are often accused of being anti-white, even though their ideology is very popular among “whites.” The accusation is certainly valid, but it is important to understand that the real object of neoracist hostility is Europeanness. The Enlightenment was arguably the greatest achievement of European civilization. In abandoning the Enlightenment, the post-left demonizes European civilization and Europeans.
  11. Influenced by postmodernism and cultural relativism, post-leftists reject universalism and see the world as a collection of groups, each with its own interests and “truth,” often irreconcilable with those of other groups. Thus, group interests and feelings (real or presumed) take precedence over objectivity, leading to the over-valuation of emotion and the social censorship of words or images deemed to be “offensive” to a group perceived to be a target of injustice. A recent example is an art history instructor at a Minnesota university who was dismissed without due process for the sin of teaching art history—by using a medieval painting of Muhammad in a lesson. The university president declared that “respect for the observant Muslim students in that classroom should have superseded academic freedom.” This is a consummate example of social censorship motivated by post-leftist ideology.
  12. …they tend to see each minority as monolithic, failing to consider the great variations which may occur within each group.

  13. The post-left prides itself on defending minorities against injustices, but in reality they do a very poor job of doing that because their real action is to denigrate majorities. Furthermore, they tend to see each minority as monolithic, failing to consider the great variations which may occur within each group.
  14. During the era of European colonialism, Europeans considered themselves to be the centre of the universe, with the duty of civilizing the rest of the world. Today, the post-left continues to place European civilization at the centre of the universe, but now that centre is allegedly rotten, imposing all forms of oppression on everyone else. The latter attitude is just the flipside of the former. Both are Eurocentric. Both are false. Both are harmful extremes. For the post-left, Europeans (i.e. “whites”) are the evil majority which constantly persecutes various minorities. Persecution in the other direction or persecution of one non-white group by another (such as the Arabo-Muslim slave trade) is rarely if ever mentioned by the post-left.
  15. A post-leftist accusation of racism is practically irrefutable—like an unfalsifiable religious belief—because there is no clear post-leftist definition which can be used to determine objectively what is racist and what is not.

  16. Neoracism differs from classic racism in one major way: while classic racists exaggerate biological differences and thus attempt to establish a hierarchy of “races,” some superior to others, neoracists simply ignore and deny biology. Neoracists do not even attempt to define “race” or “racism” in any coherent way. This allows them to make accusations of racism at will, even in the most inappropriate contexts. A post-leftist accusation of racism is practically irrefutable—like an unfalsifiable religious belief—because there is no clear post-leftist definition which can be used to determine objectively what is racist and what is not. This habit is at its worst when post-leftists conflate racial identity with religious affiliation, thus giving themselves carte blanche to throw accusations of “racism” against anyone who criticizes the religion.
  17. Right-wingers often paint the entire political left with the brush of wokism in order to discredit the left in general and make themselves—the right—look better.

  18. Post-leftists tend to consider themselves to be the very incarnation of perfect virtue. But because they do such a shoddy job of defending traditional left-wing causes (such as antiracism, male-female equality, etc.), and because they arrogantly claim to be the left, the only left (as if the universalist left did not exist), they play into the hands of the political right and far-right. The egregious and sometimes insane behaviour of post-leftists brings the left into disrepute and thus comforts and strengthens the political right. Right-wingers often paint the entire political left with the brush of wokism in order to discredit the left in general and make themselves—the right—look better.
  19. The post-left is not a political party or a well-circumscribed group. It is rather a mentality, an ideology, a prejudice whose influence has spread throughout many of the institutions of society—governments, universities, activist groups, media, etc.—in the United States, Canada and several European countries. Different people display various degrees of adherence to this ideology. Many of those who have, to some greater or lesser extent, adopted the post-leftist mentality, perhaps even unconsciously, may be unaware of the origins of that ideology. These issues must be discussed publicly so that people may learn to resist the ideological infection which post-leftism represents. The word “infection” is indeed appropriate here. Post-leftism is a parasitic infection which is destroying the political left, if it has not done so already.
  20. The antidote to post-leftism is universalism, a core Enlightenment value. Indeed, it is the cure for both racism and neoracism.

Next blog: Trudeau Appoints Anti-Québécois Racist to Combat so-called ‘Islamophobia’

“Wokism” is Not a Moral Panic

2022-10-20

No, the “woke” phenomenon is not some moral panic invented by the political right.

Sommaire en français Non, la mouvance « woke » n’est pas une panique morale inventée par la droite. Ce blogue est disponible en français sous le titre Le « wokisme » n’est pas une panique morale.

For several years, terms such as “Social Justice Warrior” (“SJW”) and “woke” were used by many members of that movement themselves, to self-identify. Over time, the word “woke” became mainstream and, as critics of “wokism” began to use it negatively, the word acquired pejorative connotations. (It is important to note that these critics are of all political persuasions, from Marxists to the political centre to people on the right.)

Now some people even claim that “wokism” does not exist, that it is just a right-wing fantasy, a “moral panic” invented by the political right to denigrate the left. That allegation is false and dishonest. The “woke” themselves adopted the word long before anyone else. Not only is “wokism” a real phenomenon but, most importantly, it is ideologically distinct from the classical political left.

So what is “wokism” anyway? It is a social movement that claims to be left-wing and prides itself on fighting for social justice and against various prejudices, especially racism. But the philosophical underpinnings of the “woke” phenomenon are strongly influenced by postmodernism and by the rejection of Enlightenment values, in particular the rejection of universalism. Its rejection of the Enlightenment represents the abandonment of the greatest achievement of European civilization.

Consequently, this movement does a very bad job of defending the minorities with which it is obsessed. The “woke” end up inflaming racism as much as fighting against it. To put it succinctly, the movement is neo-racist. I call it the post-left or the anti-Enlightenment pseudo-left.

The “woke” have the nasty habit of launching accusations of “fascism” against anyone who disagrees with them. This is very ironic—and hypocritical—because the “woke” and the far right have something very significant in common: they both reject Enlightenment values.

The excesses and follies of the “woke” are a real gift for the political right, because the latter uses them to denigrate the entire left, as if the being “woke” were synonymous with being on the political left. But this is false, because the real left is universalist.

For a more detailed presentation of “wokism,” see:


Other Links

  • Le wokisme, ce recul déguisé en progrès (“Wokism, this regress disguised as progress”), Marc Simard, Libre Média, 2022-10-08.
    “In fact, interbreeding is a threat to wokism, whose worldview is deeply rooted in racial affiliation. Racial mixing is the nemesis of the woke.”
  • The Cancer of Wokeism, Kareem Muhssin, Alliance of Former Muslims (Ireland), 2021-01-02.
    “If we want to defeat racism, then we must get over our obsession with race. We must stop seeing each other as victims or oppressors, and recognise that we are individuals with agency. We must stop looking for racism where it doesn’t exist, and start focusing on issues of substance.”

Next blog: Pauline Marois : Prix international de la laïcité 2022

Le « wokisme » n’est pas une panique morale

2022-10-14, Autres liens ajoutés 2022-10-19

Non, la mouvance « woke » n’est pas une panique morale inventée par la droite.

Summary in English No, the “woke” phenomenon is not some moral panic invented by the political right. This blog is available in English under the title “Wokism” is Not a Moral Panic.

Pendant plusieurs années, des termes tels que « Social Justice Warrior » (« SJW ») et « woke » ont été utilisés par de nombreux membres de cette mouvance eux-mêmes, pour s’identifier. Au fil du temps, le mot « woke » est devenu courant et, alors que les critiques du « wokisme » commençaient à l’utiliser de manière négative, le mot a acquis des connotations péjoratives. (Soulignons que ces critiques fusent de toutes tendances politiques : des marxistes, du centre, des gens de droite, etc.)

Maintenant, certains prétendent même que le « wokisme » n’existerait pas, que ce n’est qu’un fantasme de droite, une « panique morale » inventée par la droite politique afin de dénigrer la gauche. Cette allégation est fausse et malhonnête. Les « woke » eux-mêmes ont adopté le mot bien avant tout le monde. Non seulement le « wokisme » est un phénomène réel mais, plus important encore, il est idéologiquement distinct de la gauche politique classique, c’est-à-dire universaliste.

Qu’est-ce que le « wokisme » alors ? C’est une mouvance sociale qui se prétend de gauche et se targue de lutter pour la justice sociale et contre divers préjugés, surtout le racisme. Mais les assises philosophiques du phénomène « woke » sont fortement influencées par le postmodernisme et par le rejet des valeurs des Lumières, en particulier le rejet de l’universalisme. Son rejet les Lumières représente l’abandon du plus bel accomplissement de la civilisation européenne.

Par conséquent, cette mouvance défend très mal les minorités dont elle fait son obsession. Elle finit par attiser le racisme autant qu’elle lutte contre. C’est-à-dire que cette mouvance est néoraciste. Moi, je l’appelle la post-gauche ou la pseudogauche anti-Lumières.

Les « wokes » ont la méchante habitude de lancer des accusations de « fascisme » contre tout ce qui ne serait pas d’accord avec eux. C’est très ironque — et hypocrite — car le wokisme et l’extrême droite ont quelque chose de très significatif en commun : le rejet des Lumières.

Les excès et les folies des « wokes » constituent un vrai cadeau pour la droite politique, car celle-ci s’en sert pour dénigrer toute la gauche, comme si cette gauche ne comprenait que les « wokes » — ce qui est faux, car la vraie gauche, c’est la gauche universaliste.

Pour une présentation plus étoffée du « wokisme », voir :


Autres liens


Prochain blogue : “Wokism” is Not a Moral Panic

What the “Woke” and the Political Right Have in Common

Quite a lot, in fact.

2021-10-28

The so-called “woke”—i.e. the anti-Enlightenment pseudo-left—have much in common with the political right.

Sommaire en français Les soi-disant “woke” — c’est-à-dire la pseudo-gauche anti-Lumières — ont beaucoup en commun avec la droite politique.

Recently the term “woke” has become widely used. It is no longer understood only by the few. More importantly, it is no longer a positive term but has instead become increasingly pejorative, as criticism of the woke mentality fuses from all sides, i.e. from different parts of the political spectrum.

What is the “woke” mentality? To be precise, I call it the anti-Enlightenment pseudo-left or, more succinctly, the post-left. It is a movement of persons who consider themselves to be on the left end of the political spectrum but who have largely abandoned Enlightenment values (which are left-wing values). Thus, they have left the left. I have analyzed “wokism” in some detail in my blog The “Woke” are Not the Political Left. The woke movement is based and sourced mainly in the USA and is very chauvinistically American. However, it is spreading thoughout many English- and French-speaking countries. One major aspect of wokism—postmodernism—is ultimately of French origin.

The political right is having a field day criticizing the woke—and their criticisms are more often valid than not. And the woke are responding by claiming that the denounciations of the woke mentality are just a product of the imaginations of right-wingers. Nonsense. On the contrary, criticism of the woke comes also from the political centre and from the political left—or what little is left of it.

The fact is that the “woke” and the political right have at least two major things in common:

  1. Firstly—and obviously—they both reject Enlightenment values to some extent. After all, rejection of such values constitutes the very definition of right-wing. So by abandoning those values, the “woke” have in that sense joined the political right, or even surpassed it on the right. In fact, moderate conservatives on the centre-right often defend Enlightenment values to some degree, thus making them more progressive than the woke! For example, conservatives such as Jordan Peterson and Gad Saad have more respect for reason and modernism than do many of the woke. So if you are very woke, then congratulations! you are to the right of those two.
  2. Secondly, both the “woke” and the political right consider that the woke represent the left. This is false, as already explained. The woke have abandoned left-wing values. But both groups cling to this convenient falsehood for their own selfish purposes:
    • the woke, out of arrogance, because they consider themselves the very incarnation of perfect virtue and everyone else to be beyond the pale; and
    • the political right, out of expediency, who paint the entire political left with the brush of wokism in order to discredit the left in general and make themselves—the right—look better.

Are You “Woke”?

Are you, dear reader, “woke”? The following criteria will help decide:

  • If you think that everyone who disagrees with you is a fascist, you are definitely woke.
  • If you think that anyone who asks for your definition of fascism is a fascist, you are definitely woke.
  • If you think that “All Lives Matter” is a racist statement, then you are woke.
  • If you think that lesbians must be pressured to have sex with trans-women—and if they refuse, you accuse them of transphobia—then you are not only woke, but in addition you are homophobic and misogynist.
  • If you fail to see that “Islamic feminist” is an oxymoron, then you are woke.
  • If you think that anyone who criticizes the hijab (or other Islamic veil) as a symbol of the subjugation of women is “Islamophobic” then you are certainly woke.
  • If you think that criticizing religion is “racist” then you are probably woke. And you are certainly anti-secular.
  • If you think that anyone who supports banning the niqab in public is a white supremacist, then you are definitely woke. And possibly brain-dead.
  • If you think that anyone who says that “Islam is not a race” is a racist, then you are certainly woke.
  • If you think that the very existence of the “woke” phenomenon is a myth (probably invented by right-wingers), then you are probably woke. At any rate, you are either an intellectual slob or in denial.

Of course the above list is not exhaustive.


Next blog: Parution du livre Identité, « race », liberté d’expression.