The title of a recent magazine article Rolling Stone on the subject of a comedian who made comments deemed transphobic sums up with a lot of wit the absurdity of the recriminations of a good part of those who claim to be the targets of the culture of cancellation. ” Dave Chappelle, Who’s Definitely Canceled, to Screen New Documentary in Arenas », Could we read on October 25th. Free translation of this funny, deliberately contradictory formula: Dave Chappelle, who is absolutely banned from public space, will present a new documentary in arenas. But how can one be at the same time kept apart and at this point present?
“It has always paid off to present oneself as a victim of censorship, a hero of freedom of expression that we would defend at all costs, even if it has never been threatened,” observes Judith Lussier. “It gives the impression that what you are going to say is subversive, that your speech is so important that people want to silence you. “
Is this culture of cancellation only the invention of a right wing that likes to play the martyrs and discredit the enemy by caricaturing him? Not completely, answers the journalist in Canceled. Reflections on cancel culture, logical continuation of his test of 2019 We can’t say anything more. Activism in the age of social media. “I changed my perception a bit on that”, she specifies in an interview, referring to the long research work that preceded the writing of this book, which aspires to pacify the conversation surrounding subjects such as freedom of speech. teaching, the fate reserved for public figures denounced on social networks or the place to be given to historical figures who have not been only benefactors of humanity.
“When a subject is picked up by the right, the left has the annoying tendency to say that it simply does not exist, whereas it is more nuanced than that. The cancel culture exists, but it is a phenomenon which is extremely difficult to pin down and which is certainly not the phenomenon that the right is trying to make us believe. “A catch-all term designating the ostracization that would be suffered by people who have spoken hated words, or committed reprehensible acts, the sprawling expression cancel culture henceforth also overlap with the presumed erasure of certain works whose values would no longer be appropriate at the time.
If there are indeed people who have been ostracized from society for reasons that will be deemed understandable or abusive, recognizes the author, it is perhaps those who engage in a criticism of who holds power, or who denounce their aggressors, who most violently take this hysterization of the public debate.
Classic scenario of several of the cases scrutinized by Judith Lussier: a woman calmly formulates her grievances about a work, without calling for a boycott, then sees herself almost immediately portrayed as contemptuous of freedom of expression. “Quickly, we will have empathy for the person who is criticized, but we do not realize to what extent the person who issued the criticisms, or who denounced an assault, pays the price for this speech and, to a certain extent, it too can be “canceled”. “
The power of words
Wide panorama of the many faces of the culture of banishment, Canceled first and foremost sheds light on the processes by which elements of vocabulary are diverted from their primary meaning. Spectacular example: that of the astonishing fate of the word woke. First used by the African-American community to urge its members to stay awake in the face of racial injustices, the expression has since turned into an insult, used to invalidate the words of a whole section of the left. .
“The people who have power in our society have, among other things, the power to give words a meaning that suits them,” emphasizes Judith Lussier. And what works for people in power is to make what they call the wokes scapegoats. “
While the Independent Scientific and Technical Commission on Academic Freedom in Universities, chaired by Alexandre Cloutier, must submit its report by the end of the autumn, Judith Lussier recalls that the threats to this freedom can certainly not all be blamed on the militant left. “There are ten thousand other factors, much quieter and more insidious, that interfere with academic freedom,” she says, “such as the influence of private enterprise. “
Last year, the process of hiring Professor Valentina Azarova by the Faculty of Law at the University of Toronto was interrupted after the intervention of an influential donor, Judge David E. Spiro, indisposed by the work of the researcher on human rights violations by Israel.
“Yet a story like this doesn’t get emotional the same way it does when students denounce a conference. It’s like saying to ourselves: “This is power as we usually know it.” When it is students who exercise their power, they are told: “Calm down! It is not because you have read Foucault that you are going to come and teach us everything. ” “
But then why are we talking more about these marginal manifestations of the culture of cancellation? “Because they appeal to emotions, because we don’t want us to attack our toys, our childhood books, our freedom of expression. Except that, while we have the impression of debating ideas, we are in the register of fear and anger, ”deplores Judith Lussier, while refusing to throw stones at the media. “I’m very critical of the media, but the reason the media skips over these topics is because they are dependent on social media themselves. “
What about our governments in all of this? The French and Quebec education ministers denounced last October 22 in a joint open letter “the excesses linked to the culture of cancellation”.
“Once again, we see how it is a subject which is recovered politically, estimates Judith Lussier. We are not at all in an attempt to calm the debate when we use expressions like “memory killers”. This is not how we are going to calm the spirits. “