Overview of What 'Woke 2.0' means for the midterms
This episode of ABC News Daily explores the idea of “Woke 2.0” and whether a new wave of left-wing activism is reshaping U.S. politics ahead of the midterm elections. Guest Jonathan Chait of The Atlantic argues that while the first “woke” era broadly influenced Democratic politics and helped fuel backlash that benefited Donald Trump, the next version is different: it is now centered mainly on Palestine activism rather than racial justice or climate, and it may be less politically damaging for Democrats.
What “woke” means, according to Jonathan Chait
Chait offers his own definition of “woke” as a style of politics on the left rather than a single ideology.
Three defining traits of “woke” politics
- Manichaean worldview: issues are framed as pure good vs. pure evil, with little room for nuance.
- Issue linkage: different causes are treated as inseparable, such as climate, racial justice, and Palestinian rights.
- No real endpoint: it is more expressive and moralistic than programmatic, focused on signaling that the world is deeply broken rather than achieving a final policy win.
How “Woke 1” affected U.S. politics
Chait says the first wave of woke politics had a major influence on the Democratic Party.
- It pushed Democrats left of public opinion on issues like climate, race, and trans rights.
- It created a strong moral pressure inside the party, making it difficult for moderates to dissent.
- That atmosphere helped create conditions that Trump later used to mobilize anti-woke voters.
He argues Trump’s anti-woke messaging was powerful not just directly, but because it was a reaction to the excesses of the earlier activist wave.
What “Woke 2.0” looks like
Chait’s main claim is that a new phase of woke politics has emerged, but with a different center of gravity.
Key focus: Palestine activism
- He says Palestine has become the dominant issue for many progressive activists.
- He points to figures like Greta Thunberg and multiple activist organizations that have shifted attention from climate or racial justice to Palestine.
- In his view, the same style of activism is recurring, but with a new issue at the center.
Why this version may be different politically
Unlike the earlier woke wave, Chait thinks “Woke 2.0” may not be as politically toxic for Democrats.
- Public opinion on Palestine has moved left, so Democrats are less likely to be dragged away from the mainstream.
- The issue is less tied to changing workplace norms, speech rules, and elite institutional culture than the first wave was.
- That means it may not create the same broad backlash across American life.
Still, he warns that activists are using Palestine as a lever to push the party left on other issues too, which could create new problems for Democrats.
Trump’s role in the cycle
Chait says Donald Trump remains a radicalizing force on both sides.
- Trump’s rhetoric helped intensify concerns about racism and injustice during the first woke era.
- He may again be helping energize left-wing activism by creating a sense of crisis and danger.
- However, Chait suggests the current Palestine-centered activism is not reshaping everyday life in the same sweeping way as the earlier woke movement.
Main takeaway
The episode argues that “woke” politics did not disappear—it evolved. Jonathan Chait’s central point is that:
- Woke 1 reshaped the Democratic Party and fueled backlash.
- Woke 2.0 is more focused, more Palestine-centered, and potentially less electorally damaging.
- Even so, it may still push Democrats leftward in ways that could matter in tight races.
Notable insight
“Woke 2 has become centered around Palestine activism.”
This is the episode’s core thesis: the culture-war energy of the left has not ended, but it has changed targets.
Production notes
- Guest: Jonathan Chait, staff writer at The Atlantic
- Host: Sam Hawley
- Program: ABC News Daily