Democrats and progressives wrestle with the ‘Woke 1.0’ era

Six years after the term “woke” peaked in political lexicon amid the George Floyd protests, some on the left have taken to referring to this period of ultra-liberal declarations as “Woke 1.0,” insinuating that the upcoming midterm elections will pave the way for “Woke 2.0” as a backlash against the Trump administration. But not everyone in the Democratic Party seems to agree on how, or even if, “woke” should be used as a campaign tool.

‘We need a strong progressive movement’

The main buzz over “Woke 1.0” came after Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) referred to the era in a disparaging way in an interview with ABC News earlier this month, saying, “Woke 1 was crazy.” While “many politicians and activists no longer use the rhetoric they did six years ago,” there is “no such thing as ‘Woke 1.0,’ and it would be almost impossible to define such a time, era or set of positions,” said Perry Bacon at The New Republic. This comes even as Ocasio-Cortez herself “implied that Woke 1 included her own previous statements on abolishing the police,” said Owen Carry at USA Today.

Ocasio-Cortez’s comments “underscore an important duality,” said Bacon. “We need a strong progressive movement pushing progressive ideas, including some that are essential but not yet popular,” and we also require “progressive politicians focused largely on popular ideas so that they can win elections and power.” The early days of “woke” weren’t “just about the changing language or super far-fetched proposals” like defunding the police or canceling Thanksgiving — the “Black Lives Matter and Me Too movements were much needed reckonings in how America dealt with issues of race and gender.”

It appears the new plan for many Democrats is to “brush it off. Then refocus on the present, and on the policies that will actually make people’s lives better,” said Astead Herndon at Vox. The “broad ideals — diversity, equity, a basic sense of fairness — still matter to Democratic voters.” And it appears many of these viewpoints have remained successful: Minority and women candidates “have kept winning since 2024, and even ideas like reparations still resonate with big chunks of the Democratic electorate.”

‘How radioactive they have become’

Not all Democrats are on board with the idea of adapting the term Woke 1, as some believe it is too damaging politically. Progressive platforms “have been reshaped by an ideology centered on systemic oppression and the radical policies ostensibly needed to correct it,” said Idrees Kahloon at The Atlantic. The fact that Ocasio-Cortez is now “declining to defend — and indeed wishing to move past — these positions shows how radioactive they have become.”

Many “ideas that once seemed weighty look flimsy,” and “most members of the party’s elite apparently hope that the ideas from the period will simply recede from public consciousness,” said Kahloon. But “accompanying those movements was an adoption of postures and behaviors that signaled that one was on the right side,” said Nesrine Malik at The Guardian. Given a “chance, the left will waste capital by descending into infighting, radicalism and alienation,” which can be “blamed for what has followed Woke 1.0: the resurgence of Donald Trump.”

It was “hard to articulate exactly what Woke 1 is or, I suppose, was,” said Luke Winkie at Slate. When people “derisively say Woke 1 now, what we are gesturing at is the shudderingly visceral feeling of the whole thing — the distinct haughty tang, the way-too-online insularity and, most important, the telos that amounted to little more than inflicting guilt and experiencing guilt.” But the “challenge, for AOC and anyone else dreaming up Woke 2, is to bring the cause to scale.”