Blab Politics
Woke 1 and Woke 2: The Evolution of Progressive Rhetoric in U.S. Politics
When Alexandria Ocasio‑Cortez declared on ABC News’ This Week that “Woke 1 was crazy,” the phrase leapt from a viral meme to a headline‑grabbing label in the political arena. Her remark sparked a rapid conversation about two new buzzwords that are reshaping how progressives describe their own strategy.
The first term, “Woke 1,” traces back to a May tweet by New York City councilmember Chi Ossé. Ossé’s post—later amplified by Ocasio‑Cortez in an interview—caught the eye of millions, eventually racking up more than 7.1 million views on Twitter. In the clip, Ocasio‑Cortez referenced Francesca Hong’s 2024 Democratic primary bid for Wisconsin governor, noting Hong’s earlier social‑media calls to defund the police and a “Cancel Thanksgiving” tweet. Hong, who later said she had “walked back” those statements, was defeated by David Crowley on August 11.
Ocasio‑Cortez linked her own past comments—such as advocating for the abolition of the police after the George Floyd protests—to the broader Woke 1 movement. A USA TODAY columnist, Kofi Mframa, has described critics of Woke 1 as pointing to its “clumsy application” and “virtue‑signaling” tactics, citing examples like land acknowledgements at movie theaters and infographics that rarely translated into policy change.
The New York Times has connected the #MeToo movement to Woke 1, while Perry Bacon, writing for The New Republic, framed the era as spanning 2014‑2020. He highlighted the surge in diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) activism that prompted corporate boards to add more women and people of color. Some commentators argue that Woke 1 should not be forgotten, but rather retooled. A headline in The New Republic read, “Actually, AOC, Woke 1.0 Did a Lot of Good Things for This Country.”
Enter Woke 2, the next phase of progressive politics. Ossé explained on NPR’s Code Switch that he wants Woke 2 to be “more productive,” securing wins for Black people, trans people, and working‑class citizens while moving beyond the “culture‑war” moments of Woke 1, such as corporate Black‑Lives‑Matter campaigns. The label also surfaced in reaction to Donald Trump’s 2024 victory, as internet users began using the phrase late that year, reflecting a left‑wing desire to address unfinished business from the Biden administration.
Observers note two key shifts that characterize Woke 2. First, it steps back from some aspects of political correctness and identity politics. Second, it zeroes in on issues like affordability, universal health care, and questioning U.S. funding of Israel. The New Republic and other outlets have linked New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and 2026 Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El‑Sayed to the Woke 2 agenda.
The buzzwords have proliferated across social media. A TikTok video by @marytlovely in November 2024, with 24,200 likes, declared, “If you thought we were woke before, you done went and woke the beast. Welcome to Woke 2.0!” In June 2025, X user @alexbronzini tweeted, “WOKE IS BACK BABY. WOKE 2 IS HERE!!!!!” while captioning a screenshot of former NYC Comptroller Brad Lander questioning then‑Mayor Andrew Cuomo’s use of the phrase “illegal immigrants.” Other posts, such as a June tweet by @bo_austin_, joked that Woke 2 would keep certain media practices that were dropped during Woke 1.
The term has also found footing in more serious discussions. Samantha Hancox‑Li’s essay for Liberal Currents argues that Woke 1’s ability to mobilize against perceived systemic injustices should be retained in Woke 2, while the “excavation” aspect of cancel culture should be abandoned. A Wired article in March noted that progressives fantasize about a resurgent Woke 2, suggesting it could encompass a range of cultural moments—from the No Kings protests against Trump to Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl performance.
Today, Woke 1 and Woke 2 remain informal labels rather than formal policy frameworks. Politicians and commentators continue to use the terms to frame debates about identity politics, social justice, and policy priorities. No official legislative or party platform has adopted the terminology, and the debate over how best to balance progressive rhetoric with actionable policy remains ongoing.
In short, the two buzzwords illustrate a broader conversation within the Democratic Party about the evolution of progressive messaging. While Woke 1 is associated with a surge of social‑justice activism and performative gestures, Woke 2 seeks to redirect that energy toward concrete policy outcomes and a broader coalition. The terms are still in flux, and their ultimate influence on future elections, legislation, and party strategy is yet to be determined.
The first term, “Woke 1,” traces back to a May tweet by New York City councilmember Chi Ossé. Ossé’s post—later amplified by Ocasio‑Cortez in an interview—caught the eye of millions, eventually racking up more than 7.1 million views on Twitter. In the clip, Ocasio‑Cortez referenced Francesca Hong’s 2024 Democratic primary bid for Wisconsin governor, noting Hong’s earlier social‑media calls to defund the police and a “Cancel Thanksgiving” tweet. Hong, who later said she had “walked back” those statements, was defeated by David Crowley on August 11.
Ocasio‑Cortez linked her own past comments—such as advocating for the abolition of the police after the George Floyd protests—to the broader Woke 1 movement. A USA TODAY columnist, Kofi Mframa, has described critics of Woke 1 as pointing to its “clumsy application” and “virtue‑signaling” tactics, citing examples like land acknowledgements at movie theaters and infographics that rarely translated into policy change.
The New York Times has connected the #MeToo movement to Woke 1, while Perry Bacon, writing for The New Republic, framed the era as spanning 2014‑2020. He highlighted the surge in diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) activism that prompted corporate boards to add more women and people of color. Some commentators argue that Woke 1 should not be forgotten, but rather retooled. A headline in The New Republic read, “Actually, AOC, Woke 1.0 Did a Lot of Good Things for This Country.”
Enter Woke 2, the next phase of progressive politics. Ossé explained on NPR’s Code Switch that he wants Woke 2 to be “more productive,” securing wins for Black people, trans people, and working‑class citizens while moving beyond the “culture‑war” moments of Woke 1, such as corporate Black‑Lives‑Matter campaigns. The label also surfaced in reaction to Donald Trump’s 2024 victory, as internet users began using the phrase late that year, reflecting a left‑wing desire to address unfinished business from the Biden administration.
Observers note two key shifts that characterize Woke 2. First, it steps back from some aspects of political correctness and identity politics. Second, it zeroes in on issues like affordability, universal health care, and questioning U.S. funding of Israel. The New Republic and other outlets have linked New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and 2026 Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El‑Sayed to the Woke 2 agenda.
The buzzwords have proliferated across social media. A TikTok video by @marytlovely in November 2024, with 24,200 likes, declared, “If you thought we were woke before, you done went and woke the beast. Welcome to Woke 2.0!” In June 2025, X user @alexbronzini tweeted, “WOKE IS BACK BABY. WOKE 2 IS HERE!!!!!” while captioning a screenshot of former NYC Comptroller Brad Lander questioning then‑Mayor Andrew Cuomo’s use of the phrase “illegal immigrants.” Other posts, such as a June tweet by @bo_austin_, joked that Woke 2 would keep certain media practices that were dropped during Woke 1.
The term has also found footing in more serious discussions. Samantha Hancox‑Li’s essay for Liberal Currents argues that Woke 1’s ability to mobilize against perceived systemic injustices should be retained in Woke 2, while the “excavation” aspect of cancel culture should be abandoned. A Wired article in March noted that progressives fantasize about a resurgent Woke 2, suggesting it could encompass a range of cultural moments—from the No Kings protests against Trump to Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl performance.
Today, Woke 1 and Woke 2 remain informal labels rather than formal policy frameworks. Politicians and commentators continue to use the terms to frame debates about identity politics, social justice, and policy priorities. No official legislative or party platform has adopted the terminology, and the debate over how best to balance progressive rhetoric with actionable policy remains ongoing.
In short, the two buzzwords illustrate a broader conversation within the Democratic Party about the evolution of progressive messaging. While Woke 1 is associated with a surge of social‑justice activism and performative gestures, Woke 2 seeks to redirect that energy toward concrete policy outcomes and a broader coalition. The terms are still in flux, and their ultimate influence on future elections, legislation, and party strategy is yet to be determined.
