Why Progressives Are Backing Off ‘Woke 1’

Progressive politicians are quietly revising their past statements on issues like defunding the police and cancel culture, a move that may be more about avoiding electoral risks than genuine evolution of values.

Some prominent Democrats, such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), have downplayed or recontextualized previous stances on these issues. This revisionism is not limited to individual politicians but appears to be part of a broader effort by the Democratic left to recalibrate its message and image.

At first glance, this new approach may seem like an attempt to refocus on practical policy goals rather than divisive rhetoric. However, it becomes clear that this shift is also motivated by a desire to avoid electoral pitfalls associated with embracing “Woke 1” – the intense identity politics of the 2020 pandemic era.

The Democratic playbook now involves downplaying or reinterpreting past statements, emphasizing what hasn’t changed, and refocusing on issues likely to resonate with voters. This approach has yielded encouraging results for the party’s left wing: Zohran Mamdani renounced his support for defunding the police during his mayoral campaign and went on to win; Darializa Avila Chevalier, a DSA-backed congressional candidate, faced no significant fallout despite deleted posts opposing all deportations.

This shift in approach raises questions about its implications for the broader Democratic Party. One possibility is that it signals an attempt by progressives to reconnect with voters who have grown skeptical of their previous emphasis on identity politics. These issues – particularly race, gender, and sexuality – have always been contentious but became a litmus test for authenticity among liberal Democrats in 2020.

The real story here, however, is not about the party’s ideological shift but rather its adaptability. By adjusting their language and tone, progressive politicians may be trying to recapture electoral momentum lost during the pandemic era. The question remains whether this new approach will ultimately succeed in rebranding the Democratic left as a force for practical change or simply paper over deeper divisions within the party.

As we reflect on the “Woke 1” era, it’s clear that the real gap was not between liberal and conservative America but rather between those who inhabit the rarefied world of identity politics and everyone else. Ordinary voters – regardless of party affiliation – have always been more skeptical of hyper-specific litmus tests than their leaders.

The Democratic Party’s effort to reboot its message may be a necessary response to changing voter attitudes, but it also raises important questions about authenticity and accountability. Can politicians simply “brush off” past statements and expect voters to forget? Or does this trend signal a deeper crisis within the party – one that involves not just language but values?

The answer lies in how progressives choose to lead with their message moving forward. Will they focus on issues like data centers, education funding, or reparations, which still resonate with big chunks of the Democratic electorate? Or will they try to reboot their image by shedding the language and tone associated with “Woke 1”?

Ultimately, the future of progressive politics depends not just on what leaders choose to say but also on how they live up to those words.