Finally a first-hand account of wokeness! And we needed it: in France, by force of circumstances, its study has mainly been the work of researchers who have undergone the cancel culture of their colleagues. The non-academic aspects of the woke movement had remained somewhat in the shadows: Nora Bussigny's book-reportage therefore arrives at just the right time.

An investigative journalist by trade, the author paints a very comprehensive picture of woke circles: large Parisian associations, provincial demonstrations, politicized universities, etc. It is also a testimony to his convictions as a universalist and secular leftist, both concerned about discrimination and rejecting militant follies. 

Nora Bussigny also says she is very critical of Islam, attached to respect for the forces of law and order and opposed to the abuse of transactivism (not to the "trans" phenomenon in itself). It is from this point of view - which is not without gray areas, we will talk about it again - that we will see her describe wokeism.

The picture she paints is accurate, as far as I can tell – I frequented the same circles three years apart. We see the wokes described in detail: their comical litanies of pronouns (ael, iel, ul), the dizzying gap between their militant demands for purity and real practices (racism, exploitation, etc.), and above all their endless internal quarrels. Wokism is far from being monolithic – it is no less dangerous.

We also see the "notables of wokeism" pass by: far-left lawyers, "sociologists of diversity", indigenous politicians... those who derive, without effort or risk, the greatest media and political benefit from militant actions: the of construction is capitalism like any other.

The highlight of the report is probably the Radical Pride demonstration. It is worth telling: as always with the wokes, it is a mixture of paranoia and chaos. The organizers play at being revolutionaries threatened by the police and the fascists that it protects (obviously). To the point of organizing grandiloquent " anti-repression training ", with ultimately very banal content (advising to have a guarantee of representation, etc.). These are old children who have fun being afraid of the Big Bad Cop... who by their own admission, has never arrested any of them.

The demonstration is being prepared: it's the big clean-up. First, the journalists are expelled "from the right » (including… “Marianne”) on the pretext that they are not “ safe " Besides, we have the right because " The fascists do the same with the left-wing media. " (sic). Then the Whites are forced to walk behind the " racialized " All afternoon, the journalist, infiltrated into the security service, will curtly send them back to their place despite their pleas, and take " a malicious pleasure in confronting these white [woke] activists with their contradictions ": we won't blame him for that.

Nora Bussigny then disguises herself as a feminist TikToker. Her misandrist videos are a success, but we end up suspecting her of being a " genius troll ", i.e. a very studied parody. Having been in the same situation, it is because in my opinion she knows trop on wokeness. Radical feminists like to put on intellectual airs and cite authors' names by the bucketload deconstructed… that they have never read: most of them stopped at the novels of Virgine Despentes and the (very short) Scum Manifesto. Our journalist who took them at their word, studied Bastide, Diallo, Préciado… should not be too surprised to win in “ heated debates " by being " the most feminist of all "Too much erudition must have ended up intriguing; and the release of a video against the hijab finished making her suspect.

Then joining a group of suburban "pasters", the journalist discovers to her great pleasure that the base of the movement is sometimes opposed to radical Islam and the hunt for TERFs (feminists who do not refuse transgender ideology). They paste together the message "Religion destroys women", and the journalist leaves claiming to have finally discovered " a feminism that she finds praiseworthy ».

This is where I feel the author goes off track. Because she has met some fairly reasonable activists who share many of her beliefs (here on Islam and transactivism, elsewhere on the police), the author deduces very – too – quickly that they are not woke. It's more complicated than that: you can be a militant atheist, find that trans activism goes too far, and profess the craziest ideas. theory woke on structural racism or “rape culture.”

After that, the journalist took a course in Paris VIII in “ sociology of deviance » – in fact anti-police decolonial activism. And sees another sociologist deconstructed propose, during a conference in Ivry, a " self-organization in the face of law enforcement " (sic). The suburbanites then debate the creation of a militia. Long live the popularization of knowledge in the human sciences!

Nora Bussigny wanted to "take the temperature" in the provinces, demonstrating in Rennes and Dijon: and was able to see (a sign of the times) street sweepers there racialized forced to clean up the rubbish left by the careless protesters decolonialShe also sees strong commercial rivalries within the movement: feminist influencer against feminist influencer, Collectif Traoré against other “victims of police violence”, etc., fighting over advertising revenue or public subsidies.

The last part of the book is, in my opinion, weaker. Nora Bussigny believes she can discern a "breakdown of struggles": like the psychoanalyst Ruben Rabinovitch who followed her during her investigation, she thinks that wokeism, too absurd and violent, is dividing and will collapse. She therefore wants to put forward to activists " republicans and secularists ", especially "Arnaud", founder of an LGBT+ association refusing "intersectionality".

This is quite debatable. First, because the presence of internal conflicts is not always a weakness. Wokeism has always been divided, its strength is born from its very divisions : from the struggle emerge ever more energetic and radical factions. As long as they maintain enough cohesion to unite against the "reacs" at the right time, this is not dangerous (for them).

That the movement is becoming radicalized is not a problem: it is an asset. The radicalism of the new factions shifts the famous "Overton window": it "normalizes" the old demands, which seem "moderate" in comparison. Some woke use this strategy knowingly: we have seen it described in one of their manuals. We must therefore put an end to the "this is going too far to last", "they are harming their own cause" and other dangerous preconceived ideas.

Then, because the counter-example chosen by the journalist is dubious. If we read his remarks carefully, Arnaud is not so "republican": he is the typical example of the "moderate" woke who wants to save the movement from itself, because he fears that the new radicalism will upset public opinion. His obsession - which turns into a leitmotif - is not to do " activist ", not to be divisive: the " anathemas " and the " accusations " The slanderous statements of some people shock him, but he has no objection to the substance. The " non-mixed " for example does not bother him as much as she " in a small committee » and (again) « not militant » – that is to say discreet, not ostentatious like at Radical Pride: the main thing is that there is no scandal.

Typically again, he tries to separate " transactivists "radical and kind" trans people who only want an average life ", forgetting that both share the same fundamental demand: to force others to deny reality under penalty of "misgendering". Whether they do it more or less violently and noisily is a detail: but precisely, what bothers Arnaud is that they make "noise".

Her "republicanism" is therefore reduced to criticism of Islam and respect for the police. It is not much, but enough to seduce the journalist: as with the "splicers", we see her awarding rather quickly certificates of "non-wokeism" to those who share these two opinions, to which she clearly holds very dear. We must be wary of the labels that activists give themselves: some, not necessarily dishonest, understand by " Republican " and " universalist " quite contrary things.

The journalist's indulgence towards Arnaud has another reason, admitted: she gives him the floor because [elle] especially did not want [his] book to be read by people who would think that LGBT activism makes no sense. " We then touch on a delicate subject: the unease of certain people on the left faced with the wokismRaised in the anti-racist atmosphere of the 80s and 90s and the sincere fear of "discrimination", some found themselves helpless when the wokes began to invent absurd things and to accuse everyone - themselves first.

And they no longer know where to place themselves: they oscillate between their common sense and the fear of " to ultimately be nothing more than [reac[s]] ". Hence the often absurd positions of forced "compromise", on transidentity for example. The author thus maintains (like many others of the same political current) that " Trans people exist and have the right without being discriminated against "but sex change is" questionable for teenagers " and that all this should not " invisibilize "women (she cites Family Planning, known for its misogynistic trans lexicon)

A generous position, but one that does not hold water: if transgender people exist, i.e. if a woman can be born in a man's body and suffer from it, then it must operate it and as soon as possible. Otherwise she will never really look like she belongs to the opposite sex: late operations have disastrous results. And to talk about " uterus carrier » or other terms invisibilizers for women is scientifically sound, if gender theory is.

The real answer is to point out that it is not: we have never had any proof of it. Until proven otherwise, "transgenders" are no different from other people who practice extreme body transformations: who have the right to do so, but do not demand to be called "lizards" because they got upset about it, and do not cry "discrimination" if it puts others off. But this leads to hurting the "feelings" of people described as "oppressed": some people can hardly do it without feeling guilty.

So they remain in the middle of the ford, in a slippery position where they feel more guilty every day, with the permanent temptation to give in to the views of the adversary: ​​what if the wokes were right? Wokes who do not hesitate to exploit this guilt – see the famous sessions rehabilitation by Robin DiAngelo. This anxiety comes back again and again, in the report or in the interviews with the psychoanalyst Ruben Rabinovitch that intersperse it. The journalist admits it with great courage: and it is this admission that gives all its depth to the book.

Nora Bussigny, The New Inquisitors : The investigation of an infiltrator in woke lands, Paris, Albin Michel, 2023, €19,90