Let's punish the wokophobes!

We are witnessing an increase in inappropriate, scandalous, dishonorable and unethical language...

It is no longer acceptable for individuals to publicly express transphobic, Islamophobic, blasphemous, wokophobic positions...

Convictions for good conduct or fines are clearly insufficient.

To put an end to this reactionary climate, we need to introduce far more severe penal sanctions, such as the rehabilitation of the cangue or the pillory and the public indignity that goes with it.

Tract_22E| Woke-Machine.org | Download the tract_en_22

Scientific arguments

The rise of anti-woke rhetoric: call for tougher law enforcement.

Our society is facing a worrying rise in hate speech, which is spreading at breakneck speed on social networks and in the public arena. Transphobic, Islamophobic, blasphemous... In short, wokophobia is particularly violent and discriminatory towards its victims. And, alas, the cancel culture put in place by the more enlightened is proving ineffective. Faced with this situation, the questions of legal qualification and penal repression are posed with new acuity. While awareness-raising courses and fines are a first step, they are not enough to curb this scourge. Many observers believe that there is an urgent need to step up criminal sanctions against the perpetrators of hate speech.

Limits of current sanctions.

Administrative sanctions, such as withdrawing passwords or closing social networking accounts, may act as a deterrent, but they don't get to the root of the problem. Similarly, awareness-raising courses, while laudable in principle, are not enough to change people's deep-seated convictions. As for fines, they can be perceived as a mere financial penalty by some hate speech perpetrators, who may have considerable financial resources at their disposal.

The need for tougher criminal law enforcement.

To combat hate speech effectively, it is necessary to strengthen the existing penal framework. Several avenues can be explored:

• Broadening the scope of offenses : Current laws do not cover all types of hate speech. It would therefore be necessary to broaden the scope of offences to include speech inciting wokophobic discrimination, which is sometimes opaque.
• Increasing the penalties incurred : The penalties incurred by the perpetrators of hate speech must be sufficiently dissuasive to discourage any attempt at transgression. In our hyper-narcissistic society, recourse to the cangue, the pillory and the public indignity that accompany them would be a first step; prison sentences could be envisaged for the most serious cases.
• Easier prosecution: Criminal proceedings in hate speech cases are often long and complex. To facilitate prosecution, procedures should be simplified and the resources available to the judicial authorities strengthened. For example, a benevolent police force would ensure that freedom of expression is expressed with empathy, and would punish any deviation by means of accelerated procedures.

Conclusion. The rise of wokophobic discourse is a serious threat to social cohesion. While administrative sanctions and awareness-raising courses can play a role, the existing penal framework needs to be strengthened to effectively combat this scourge. This repression must, of course, be accompanied by preventive and awareness-raising measures, such as kindness classes starting in kindergarten, in order to build a more inclusive society that respects differences.

Download the Tract_en_22 A4 - PDF | X size JPG (600x1200)

We apologise in advance if anything on this page offends you. If this is the case, please go here.

This page has been translated by someone whose original language is not English. Please improve it by contacting us.