Xavier-Laurent Salvador is an associate professor of modern literature and a lecturer in medieval language and literature. He is also the co-founder of the Observatory of decolonialism and identity ideologies.
To discover
Crosswords, arrow words, 7 Letters... Free to play anywhere, anytime with the Le Figaro Games app
LE FIGARO.
- In your book, you analyze the spread of the woke ideology in the French university.
What is Wokism?
Xavier-Laurent SALVADOR.
-
Under the name "Wokism" hides the phenomenon of penetration of critical theories of race and gender in the university.
And this, in particular in disciplines where these notions should not have a storefront, such as the LSHS (Letters, Humanities and Social Sciences), which concern literature, linguistics, history and geography, but also the hard sciences. .
"Deconstruction", "white privilege"... Is it thanks to these words that these American theories were able to cross the Atlantic, to be taught in France?
These simple expressions qualify concepts that seem to be very deep.
But in reality, the latter allow researchers to save themselves too complex thinking.
This results in making woke theories keys to reading for other disciplines.
However, if there is a reading grid, it means that there is no longer any object of research.
The term "white privilege", coined by Peggy McIntosh in the United States, for example, most certainly has its place in sociology and deserves to be explored and debated.
But the problem lies in the semantic neology, of which certain researchers are at the origin.
In their mouths, in front of their students, the words they use to talk about these concepts become hollow, while giving themselves the appearance of being scholars.
“From the moment Wokism provides keywords that function as political signals, it creates a divide between those who belong to this clan and those who oppose it”
If the terms that the promoters of these theories disseminate do not have a universal reading grid, can we say that they make language a dangerous tool?
Language in itself is not dangerous, rhetoric is.
The woke ideologues are the first to fill their texts with argumentative illusions, with learned words that the general public does not understand.
This rhetoric, which aims to mimic scientific discourse, is obviously dangerous.
This is the very principle of the sophism.
And under cover of scholarly speech, there is in reality a political speech that leads straight down an extremely slippery slope.
From the moment Wokism provides keywords that function as political signals, there is a way to create a divide between those who belong to this clan and those who oppose it.
We summon, in a way, the students to position themselves in relation to a political opinion.
This is where this hold that I denounce comes into play.
Read alsoDo you speak “woke”?
Institutions such as the Inspé where wokism is spreading, which promotes inclusive writing in particular, train the teachers of tomorrow.
Is there a risk that French, as we have learned it, will disappear?
Inclusive writing, which you cite as an example and which may seem harmless, is a militant and political signal that instrumentalizes spelling because people have decided that the language belongs to them.
This is the subject of a book by the linguist Eliane Viennot, who says:
“The language belongs to us.”
But this “we” remains to be defined.
Who is he against?
To those who speak French, to academics, to science?
It is actually a kind of anti-Villers-Cotterêts, a desire to reform the language of the State, that which concerns private and public administrations.
In short, they make language a divisive tool, in the service of an ideology that forces individuals to position themselves in the camp of the good or in that of the damned.
“According to the wokists, the vision of French is opposed to literature and poetry.
If they could exclude the poets from the Republic, they would undoubtedly do it”
In your book, you summon "post-linguists" to take into account the fact that language is not just a process of encoding and decoding messages.
Do you think that these strip the language of all its poetry?
Ever since Butler, proponents of wokism have believed in a kind of language magic.
They think what they say will happen and what they think can happen when they say it.
They are actually afraid of the language.
They therefore deprive him of his ability to emerge from a regime other than the political regime.
In this sense, their vision of French is opposed to literature and poetry.
If they could exclude the poets from the Republic, they probably would.
Finally, can we still reply, debate, with the wokists?
It is obvious that the dialogue is broken with these ideologues, who have decided to be political actors.
With them, we cannot fight because the foundation of their being is based on their adherence to this misguided vision of science and ideology.
On the other hand, it is essential to discuss it with young students, future adults who are wondering about the society of tomorrow.
It is vital.
We cannot give it up.
The general public, as a third-party observer, must also be informed so as not to give up talking about it in the public debate.
It is the duty of the Republic and of democracy to organize this dialogue.
