Wokeism claims to embody social justice and equal opportunity, but it is nothing more than a sham devoid of philosophical foundation and theoretical corpus. Young people who identify with critical race or gender theory movements have not even read the authors who developed these theories. Instead of understanding the political and philosophical implications of their actions, they adhere to a posture of moral activism.
In France, wokeism has found fertile ground in academia, where some use the institution to promote their moralistic vision and legitimize it. Let us recall the controversy sparked by the bill “strengthening respect for the principles of the Republic” and in particular Article 14 which provided for strengthening the neutrality obligations of people working in public services, including in higher education establishments. This provision has been strongly criticised by some academics who claim to see it as an attack on academic freedom and the autonomy of institutions.. They were actually looking for a political clash and through this, to impose their vision of the world by using methods of pressure, censorship and discredit to silence any form of criticism. The University no longer serves to produce scientific thought, but to endorse a moral thought that attempts to impose its vision of the world.
Young people who claim to be part of the critical race or gender theory movements do not know these authors and have not read them: is it sincerely claimed that they have read them all? Kimberley Williams Crenshaw ? And that they see in Judih Butler a liberating philosopher? Anyone who has ever taught at the University knows what is really going on in terms of readings… Probably these children feel more comfortable with a morality that seems right to them, rather than with concepts and theories that may seem difficult to understand. In any case, they adopt a posture of moral activism without necessarily understanding the philosophical and political implications of their actions.
Let us remember the case of the Alsatian teacher who had mentioned the caricatures of Mohammed in front of his students, leading to death threats from some parents. Some woke activists then exploited this affair to put forward their moralizing discourse, accusing the teacher of racism and colonialism.
This lack of philosophical foundation does not mean that woke ideas are harmless. On the contrary, they can be extremely dangerous when used to justify policies that challenge the core values of democracy.
Wokism presents itself as a morality that claims to say what is good or bad in terms of morals. From this point of view, it represents a failure of sociology that becomes prescriptive. The supporters of wokism seek to impose their vision of the world through a militia of thought, which uses methods of pressure, censorship and discredit to silence any form of criticism. In this context, the University plays the role of scientific guarantor of moral thought relayed by different circles, the media main stream to GAFAM. It thus serves as a support to promote a moralizing vision and legitimize it through a bundle of connotations. The word "University" itself is nothing more than a slogan designed to credit "experts" with superficial legitimacy.
This approach is extremely dangerous, because it can lead to the creation of a new moral aristocracy that would call into question the principle of citizen equality. It is essential to remember that in a democratic society, every citizen must have the same right to speak and that the vote of an ordinary man is worth as much as that of a sociologist with a supposedly complex mind. Wokeism, as a morality, is regressive. It refers individuals to their intimate practices (their sexuality, their behavior in society) and places them in a position of guilt from which they struggle to disentangle themselves. In this permanent arbitration between good and evil, the minority plays the role of harmless victim. But it is a weapon used against the democratic majority that we seek to destabilize.
When they keep raising the issue of the "moral panic" that is gripping their detractors, they are not accusing anyone: they are only expressing a wish.
