New York Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has described the politics of 2020 using the phrase "Woke 1," a term borrowed from New York City Councilman Chi Ossé. This framing, according to opinion pieces, offers Democrats a way to distance themselves from progressive policies such as defunding the police and abolishing prisons that gained traction in 2020.
This approach, described as compartmentalization, allows for the separation of conflicting ideas or past actions from present political strategies without direct confrontation or reconciliation. It creates a division between the Democratic Party of 2020, when once-fringe progressive ideas influenced the mainstream, and the party's current focus on issues like affordability and economic populism.
Some analysts suggest that this tactic aims to draw a line between past progressive rhetoric and the party's current messaging, potentially allowing Democrats to avoid confronting the implications of earlier stances. The concern is that phrases like "abolish ICE" could age as poorly as "defund the police," according to reports.
During 2020, many political beliefs became markers of personal character rather than solely policy positions. Challenging prevailing views at the time sometimes carried a social or political cost. The "Woke 1" label, as used by Ocasio-Cortez, could be interpreted as an attempt to frame these past positions as belonging to a temporary, unusual moment that the party has since moved beyond.
However, the New York Times reported that Democrats are concerned about how these past slogans might be perceived. The article posits that if Democrats now reject positions they previously embraced or tolerated, voters are likely seeking an explanation. The core question raised is whether the party has genuinely changed its views or is adapting to shifting voter sentiment.
There is a perspective that changing one's mind is not inherently negative, but true change involves acknowledging past beliefs and explaining where they were mistaken. Without this acknowledgment, voters may question whether the shifts are based on principle or political expediency. Every political party, the analysis notes, seeks to distance itself from inconvenient positions. However, the moral identity often attached to political beliefs in 2020 makes abandoning a stance feel like a personal admission rather than a policy correction.
An alternative approach suggested is for Democrats to acknowledge that while 2020 highlighted genuine societal problems, it also led to the development of problematic ideas. This would involve conceding that some rhetoric may have been excessive and that individuals who questioned the prevailing consensus may have been treated unfairly, without abandoning concerns about racism, police misconduct, or inequality. This path requires admitting the possibility of being wrong despite strong moral conviction.
The phrase "Woke 1 was crazy" is characterized as resembling a confession but lacking the critical element of naming what was wrong. Instead, compartmentalization is seen as a method of setting aside those past ideas without a thorough examination.