As a long time independent voter, I thought this past election would cause the 50% of us who are not Democrats or Republicans to conclude that it was just too hard to pick the lesser of two evils. However, the open border policy, rising crime rate, censorship, lawfare, and overspending was just too much to tolerate. Consequently, independent voters selected Trump.
Once again, the Hollywood establishment demonstrated their selfishness by backing Harris who they believed would protect their financial interests. Without protection from federal regulators, large companies will eventually buy the money losing studios. Without protection from the IRS, the various tax evasion plans will be exposed.
Once again, we are favorably impressed with Roy Price's analysis.
Ill bet this was the most rewarding substack post (or any post for that matter) that you have ever written. Happy to have you back on the scene. Come make some productions in Georgia …we need you.
I have been touring the US with my docs since 2019 and saw first hand how underserved audiences were. Treated like dummies who cannot think for themselves, let alone have something to offer to the world and us filmmakers. I think every filmmaker should tour with their films, sit in the back of a theater and soak up the wisdom from conversations in Q&As.
I think the whole Disco rise and fall saga shows that when something becomes so dominantly mainstream to the point it sidelines other attitudes, voices, tastes, thoughts, and expressions, it creates a subculture that eventually unites into a backlash. The less hegemonic American culture became over the next two decades, that seemed to happen less and less. Genres and tastes would have their high-points and then they would just fizzle into something new. In a way, one could say the rise and fall of woke showed a similar trajectory in that it tried using corporate America and political parties to bring Americans into hegemony underneath the woke umbrella and it brewed a serious backlash; Trump obviously being one of the chief figureheads.
Beautiful put! I’m sure the studios will be cleaning house of the woke infested Executive and creatives with a sigh of relief that they can go back to making main stream commercial product and we can laugh again. Good luck Roy there’s a studio waiting.
You probably already know this, but things have been more or less the same (if not significantly more extreme in the same direction) in the context of the independent scene and with regard to festivals and the various nonprofits that make it their mission to support independent film (and art in general).
I think pieces like these are instructive, because they always ignore the key element in making art: empathy. Roger Ebert once said that movies are empathy machines. Nowhere in this piece does it actually describe the complete lack of empathy these supposed "forgotten viewers" have shown through their votes towards people different than them.
On one level, I understand the notion that people feel Hollywood has abandoned them. I watch movies about regular Americans all the time, and I get the sense they make regular American viewers feel like martians. It's just a lack of a recognizable reality for most people.
But what's the answer to this? When have movies ever reflected a recognizable reality? Are you telling me a movie of yesteryear like "Pretty Woman" that achieved mainstream crossover success connects with real people? What of "Coming To America"? "Titanic"? Some of the biggest movies ever made are not radically different to the movies of today as to be alienating to modern suburban American audiences.
What would this new Hollywood that plays to Trump voters be like? Would it have more movies about faith? Would it have more movies about realistic middle-class communities? I honestly want to know, what are these movies that will bring right wing culture warriors back to the movies? Don't say it's gotta be something like "Sound Of Freedom", a xenophobic slice of paranoia boosting a hogwash story of a fraud and phony-turned hero. That helps no one.
Movies about faith? Sure. But they have to be serious. The movies made about Christians today play exclusively to Christians, depicting all-Christian worldviews that largely ignore or token-ify non-Christians, illustrating a worldview that isn't out of line with Christian Nationalism (and irrelevant to our everyday life, when we go to jobs and work side-by-side with people of varied faiths). How do we make better faith movies? I'm onboard with that, but are audiences? Talk to pastors all over the country, they'll tell you they're being approached by their flock to be lectured on which parts of the Bible today are and are not relevant. Everyday Joes coming out of the pews to tell priests that Jesus wouldn't actually feel that way about the homeless, Jesus would actually smite homosexuals, Jesus would not turn the other cheek at this or that. Christianity, like all American religions, has become a Rorschach blot to its own followers.
Should they make more movies for gun owners? Obviously not an under-served demographic, quit playing.
Any talk of Hollywood movies being anti-male, well -- good Lord, let's not go there, that's not a thing.
You're talking about an ideological divide with no thoughts on how to fix it. Is it maybe because there's a whole chunk of the country that's lost and will remain lost? A whole chunk of the country awash in grievance? Look at the top podcasts -- so many of them are right-wing political, but they're not based in meat-and-potatoes stuff, it's all culture-warrior nonsense. And it's so popular that you have to conclude people are listening to this for entertainment. They're listening to anger and fury and resentment, because that's how they are entertained. That's FUN to them. You're telling me that's not a bigger problem then "Oh no, we're not making movies for Mr. And Mrs. Joe Schmo"? People are blowing their stacks, showing their righteous anger, as a PASTIME. It's fun for them. And you think these people should be courted by actual artists? That a screenwriter needs to get in the ring with these half-wits to entertain all these rejected men?
Maybe it's because "woke" isn't a thing. It once had a revolutionary purpose, that word, decades ago..Now, it seems to be used for anything that doesn't center straight white men. Anything that appears ideological simply because it's an alternative to the white male patriarchy that is -- still -- our dominant mode of storytelling. It's a slur that means nothing, only used to denote what someone hates as opposed to what something believes. "Anti-woke" is also not a thing. We think of something like transgender issues as "woke", but if the average American confronts a transgender person, more often than not they will be friendly and accommodating, if only to get by. There will be hatred too, which is something we have to fight to eradicate. But removed from all the fonts and posts and gifs of the internet, most people treat people like people. It's only that angry right wing sphere that wants to turn transgender people into a walking issue.
Also, for the cheap seats, Donald Trump committed crimes. We need to stop looking for grey areas here. Everything he confessed to, everything he said to explain away the accusations, was a confession. He is undoubtedly a criminal. Why should we humor those who think otherwise because of their outrage media of choice? THAT'S a failure of media.
Interesting that you bring up Disco Demolition, one of my all-time favorite sports stories. You claim it was evidenced that Disco was dead. Except that, historically, it was well-known to be a knee-jerk gatekeeping rockist reaction to dance music preferred by the marginalized, a desperate grab for the guitars over glitter and Disco balls. Disco Demolition still lives on in the sad men who remain protective of rock music of the 80's and 90's despite rock still being made today by excellent and widely-ignored artists. You won't get them to listen to Travis Scott or Da Baby, but they also won't cue up any recent Wilco when they can take their one thousandth listen of Tom Petty's "Won't Back Down". And you think these people, so terrified of anything different, should be coddled and marketed to?
You wanna say that Hollywood screwed up by ignoring entire demographics? Ok. Then talk about how you can bring them back. And without the transparent pandering. I'm curious to know.
I think it just means getting back to classic storytelling where the themes and the expression of the artist take center-stage over agenda-pushing, right or left. The movies that make you think (or not think at all, a la PRETTY WOMAN) instead of the movies that tell you what to think. I also agree that a huge portion of the market has been consuming outrage culture, but some of that is in reaction to alienation while another is in reaction to social media algorithms (this is the biggest problem, I would say). But I think that industry would likely take a hit substantially if the broader culture moved into an apolitical space that entertained the masses with thoughtful stories and music while the makers of those stories were more concerned with being symbol of unity instead of being a political advocate.
Name me an anti-male movie. And I mean genuinely anti-male, not "the villain is a man". Because yes, I think the "thousands of men" think that something is anti-male when it simply doesn't center males.
Look at the top performing movies and television series, aired or streaming, and most are led by straight white male heroes. I'd love to know where all this "woke" content is that's supposedly being shoved down throats. Meanwhile, the very existence of a black or female lead in many shows causes mass review bombing. It's the age of grievances, and none are more aggrieved than the very ones who have always been, and remain, center stage.
Anti-wokeness is more aggressive and demeaning than wokeness, which stands for giving a voice to those who have been historically oppressed and silenced. Perhaps the average american should partake in more soul-searching and read more history in an effort to understand what “the intellectuals” base their opinions on. Being anti-something is easy and requires very little brain activity, but it is not as satisfying as learning about the world and those who make up the fabric of our society.
I think you are making good arguments, but I think the way that you are describing wokeness turns it into a bogeyman of impossible proportions compared to what it actually is.
You claim that "wokeness" is choosing politics before art and I do not that think is true or even a question that can be asked. The philosophy that underlined wokeness was a simple and respectable one. We should be aware that what we consume impacts not only ourselves but the people around us and that these patterns of consumption can lead to injustice at scale. If I consume a piece of media that is connected to industry practices that hurt others, individuals that have engaged in problematic or even violent behavior, or ideas that perpetuate harm to others I need to be AWARE that it is connected to those things. Wokeness never compelled, our morals compel us. Wokeness makes us aware of an inequity, a troubled past and hurt individuals, an industry practice that workers actively complain about, or academic data showing something that is directly harming human society. It is in the face of being presented with these details that our morals compel us to act or not act.
Wokeness exists as a method for humans to proliferate preferences. If I have two burger options and one of them was created by a company that is engaged in horrible farming practices that hurt cows, I know that I don't want to contribute to that action, so I would choose a different burger. If there is a film that was directed by someone with >5+ sexual assault violations, I don't really want to contribute to that persons' success, even if the art that they create is good. We live in the most creatively abundant time the earth has ever seen. I definitely can find something else to watch that will be just as good, if not better, but without me contributing to that director who could use his success to potentially hurt more people. Wokeness is just an idea that you are aware of the consequences of certain behaviors and the externalities that our consumption decisions have.
You claim that "Wokeness" is being wielded violently against it's opponents. No, that's not accurate. Wokeness is not being wielded. People are woke so they see the problematic threads underlying something and then their morals compel them to either support or attack that thing. What you are decrying as hysteria is the same thing that has been done since the dawn of time. There is a group of people with moral preferences that want to have other people behave like them and actively seek to stop people from behaving differently.
What I think your post is specifically complaining about when it comes to wokeness is that if you have different opinions or morals then those that are woke currently, then you will receive social criticism for it. Your more specific claim is that this compels people to not speak their minds and thus dampens the creative output of Hollywood. Please tell me, how is this different than say the Red Scare? The Inquisition? The Salem Witch Trials? There is a group of people in cultural power and they are enforcing their values by wielding social capital. That has literally been the status quo since the dawn of time.
This is also where your idea of being "Anti-Woke" falls apart. Ask anyone from this currently woke group of people what values they prioritize and they would likely give the same values you are ascribing as what's important or close to them. Everyone believes that they are fighting for the right thing and that enables them to use social capital against their foes. Funny enough, you are doing the same thing in this article, as all rhetoricians do.
The point I'm making is that Wokeness is a bogeyman. I will not deny that there are not militant leftists that will use social capital in numbers to punish people who believe differently from them. Let me tell you, I'm only slightly left leaning, and if I spend any time with my conservative family in the south, the same things happen to me. So this is not really some one sided battle that you are fighting for the resistance on.
The facts for most "Anti-Woke" people, as you describe them, are that you have certain values and opinions and others disagree with you. Really, it appears that you are just mad that enough people agree with that criticism of the opinions you hold and you resent their ability to use social capital against you when deciding which preferences to propagate culturally. If people don't agree with the values of a director, let them protest or vote with their dollars. People are allowed to have their own preferences for the people they support and which types of values they are going to propagate or shame. For every person complaining about the woke mob, there is someone that was a victim or a religious, lynch, or fascist mob.
One doesn't get a special pass just because one thinks they do. The world is connected and our actions affect one another. If someone believes your actions to be affecting someone else in a way that their values interpret as negative, they should have the right to vote with their actions, dollars, and words. I think people are just mad now that some of their opinions are not as publicly supported as they once were and that they would face actual consequences for holding them, which, people should be held accountable for.
Disco was killed by a bunch of whiny punks who had been, as the disco youth of the prior generation had been, getting into the edgier sounds of the future and deciding that they didn't like the status quo or what was played on the radio, so they acted out. I'm not going to mythologize a bunch of teenagers doing the teenager thing imaginably. It was not some cultural victory. It was just a generational cohort stepping into the spotlight in it's youth, nothing more, nothing less.
Another way to look at it is, "woke" is simply nothing but the political correctness of the 1960s/1970s, but with internet, "smart" phones and social media.
A repeat of the 1980s seems unlikely though. More probable is a repeat of the 1920s and 1930s.
Fantastic piece, Roy. This is the end of an era. Let's create better art to celebrate American culture as the country turns 250.
As a long time independent voter, I thought this past election would cause the 50% of us who are not Democrats or Republicans to conclude that it was just too hard to pick the lesser of two evils. However, the open border policy, rising crime rate, censorship, lawfare, and overspending was just too much to tolerate. Consequently, independent voters selected Trump.
Once again, the Hollywood establishment demonstrated their selfishness by backing Harris who they believed would protect their financial interests. Without protection from federal regulators, large companies will eventually buy the money losing studios. Without protection from the IRS, the various tax evasion plans will be exposed.
Once again, we are favorably impressed with Roy Price's analysis.
Ill bet this was the most rewarding substack post (or any post for that matter) that you have ever written. Happy to have you back on the scene. Come make some productions in Georgia …we need you.
I have been touring the US with my docs since 2019 and saw first hand how underserved audiences were. Treated like dummies who cannot think for themselves, let alone have something to offer to the world and us filmmakers. I think every filmmaker should tour with their films, sit in the back of a theater and soak up the wisdom from conversations in Q&As.
Thank you for your bold and insightful writing!
I think the whole Disco rise and fall saga shows that when something becomes so dominantly mainstream to the point it sidelines other attitudes, voices, tastes, thoughts, and expressions, it creates a subculture that eventually unites into a backlash. The less hegemonic American culture became over the next two decades, that seemed to happen less and less. Genres and tastes would have their high-points and then they would just fizzle into something new. In a way, one could say the rise and fall of woke showed a similar trajectory in that it tried using corporate America and political parties to bring Americans into hegemony underneath the woke umbrella and it brewed a serious backlash; Trump obviously being one of the chief figureheads.
Beautiful put! I’m sure the studios will be cleaning house of the woke infested Executive and creatives with a sigh of relief that they can go back to making main stream commercial product and we can laugh again. Good luck Roy there’s a studio waiting.
Yes a trenchant piece and God bless you for speaking truth. What a novel idea..artistic expression unencumbered by politics.
You probably already know this, but things have been more or less the same (if not significantly more extreme in the same direction) in the context of the independent scene and with regard to festivals and the various nonprofits that make it their mission to support independent film (and art in general).
https://cinematimshel.substack.com/p/ideologically-out-of-line-and-insufficiently
Let's hope that the way this sort of ideology has now been so thoroughly demonstrated to be a dismal political failure will finally spur some change.
Well put, Roy!
Well said, Roy. Hopefully 2025 will be The Year of the Comeback.
I think pieces like these are instructive, because they always ignore the key element in making art: empathy. Roger Ebert once said that movies are empathy machines. Nowhere in this piece does it actually describe the complete lack of empathy these supposed "forgotten viewers" have shown through their votes towards people different than them.
On one level, I understand the notion that people feel Hollywood has abandoned them. I watch movies about regular Americans all the time, and I get the sense they make regular American viewers feel like martians. It's just a lack of a recognizable reality for most people.
But what's the answer to this? When have movies ever reflected a recognizable reality? Are you telling me a movie of yesteryear like "Pretty Woman" that achieved mainstream crossover success connects with real people? What of "Coming To America"? "Titanic"? Some of the biggest movies ever made are not radically different to the movies of today as to be alienating to modern suburban American audiences.
What would this new Hollywood that plays to Trump voters be like? Would it have more movies about faith? Would it have more movies about realistic middle-class communities? I honestly want to know, what are these movies that will bring right wing culture warriors back to the movies? Don't say it's gotta be something like "Sound Of Freedom", a xenophobic slice of paranoia boosting a hogwash story of a fraud and phony-turned hero. That helps no one.
Movies about faith? Sure. But they have to be serious. The movies made about Christians today play exclusively to Christians, depicting all-Christian worldviews that largely ignore or token-ify non-Christians, illustrating a worldview that isn't out of line with Christian Nationalism (and irrelevant to our everyday life, when we go to jobs and work side-by-side with people of varied faiths). How do we make better faith movies? I'm onboard with that, but are audiences? Talk to pastors all over the country, they'll tell you they're being approached by their flock to be lectured on which parts of the Bible today are and are not relevant. Everyday Joes coming out of the pews to tell priests that Jesus wouldn't actually feel that way about the homeless, Jesus would actually smite homosexuals, Jesus would not turn the other cheek at this or that. Christianity, like all American religions, has become a Rorschach blot to its own followers.
Should they make more movies for gun owners? Obviously not an under-served demographic, quit playing.
Any talk of Hollywood movies being anti-male, well -- good Lord, let's not go there, that's not a thing.
You're talking about an ideological divide with no thoughts on how to fix it. Is it maybe because there's a whole chunk of the country that's lost and will remain lost? A whole chunk of the country awash in grievance? Look at the top podcasts -- so many of them are right-wing political, but they're not based in meat-and-potatoes stuff, it's all culture-warrior nonsense. And it's so popular that you have to conclude people are listening to this for entertainment. They're listening to anger and fury and resentment, because that's how they are entertained. That's FUN to them. You're telling me that's not a bigger problem then "Oh no, we're not making movies for Mr. And Mrs. Joe Schmo"? People are blowing their stacks, showing their righteous anger, as a PASTIME. It's fun for them. And you think these people should be courted by actual artists? That a screenwriter needs to get in the ring with these half-wits to entertain all these rejected men?
Maybe it's because "woke" isn't a thing. It once had a revolutionary purpose, that word, decades ago..Now, it seems to be used for anything that doesn't center straight white men. Anything that appears ideological simply because it's an alternative to the white male patriarchy that is -- still -- our dominant mode of storytelling. It's a slur that means nothing, only used to denote what someone hates as opposed to what something believes. "Anti-woke" is also not a thing. We think of something like transgender issues as "woke", but if the average American confronts a transgender person, more often than not they will be friendly and accommodating, if only to get by. There will be hatred too, which is something we have to fight to eradicate. But removed from all the fonts and posts and gifs of the internet, most people treat people like people. It's only that angry right wing sphere that wants to turn transgender people into a walking issue.
Also, for the cheap seats, Donald Trump committed crimes. We need to stop looking for grey areas here. Everything he confessed to, everything he said to explain away the accusations, was a confession. He is undoubtedly a criminal. Why should we humor those who think otherwise because of their outrage media of choice? THAT'S a failure of media.
Interesting that you bring up Disco Demolition, one of my all-time favorite sports stories. You claim it was evidenced that Disco was dead. Except that, historically, it was well-known to be a knee-jerk gatekeeping rockist reaction to dance music preferred by the marginalized, a desperate grab for the guitars over glitter and Disco balls. Disco Demolition still lives on in the sad men who remain protective of rock music of the 80's and 90's despite rock still being made today by excellent and widely-ignored artists. You won't get them to listen to Travis Scott or Da Baby, but they also won't cue up any recent Wilco when they can take their one thousandth listen of Tom Petty's "Won't Back Down". And you think these people, so terrified of anything different, should be coddled and marketed to?
You wanna say that Hollywood screwed up by ignoring entire demographics? Ok. Then talk about how you can bring them back. And without the transparent pandering. I'm curious to know.
Fromtheyardtothearthouse.substack.com
I think it just means getting back to classic storytelling where the themes and the expression of the artist take center-stage over agenda-pushing, right or left. The movies that make you think (or not think at all, a la PRETTY WOMAN) instead of the movies that tell you what to think. I also agree that a huge portion of the market has been consuming outrage culture, but some of that is in reaction to alienation while another is in reaction to social media algorithms (this is the biggest problem, I would say). But I think that industry would likely take a hit substantially if the broader culture moved into an apolitical space that entertained the masses with thoughtful stories and music while the makers of those stories were more concerned with being symbol of unity instead of being a political advocate.
"Any talk of Hollywood movies being anti-male, well -- good Lord, let's not go there, that's not a thing."
Oh, wow. I'm glad you've solved that by not thinking about it. All the thousands of men who say otherwise must be making it up.
Name me an anti-male movie. And I mean genuinely anti-male, not "the villain is a man". Because yes, I think the "thousands of men" think that something is anti-male when it simply doesn't center males.
Fromtheyardtothearthouse.substack.com
Look at the top performing movies and television series, aired or streaming, and most are led by straight white male heroes. I'd love to know where all this "woke" content is that's supposedly being shoved down throats. Meanwhile, the very existence of a black or female lead in many shows causes mass review bombing. It's the age of grievances, and none are more aggrieved than the very ones who have always been, and remain, center stage.
Anti-wokeness is more aggressive and demeaning than wokeness, which stands for giving a voice to those who have been historically oppressed and silenced. Perhaps the average american should partake in more soul-searching and read more history in an effort to understand what “the intellectuals” base their opinions on. Being anti-something is easy and requires very little brain activity, but it is not as satisfying as learning about the world and those who make up the fabric of our society.
I think you are making good arguments, but I think the way that you are describing wokeness turns it into a bogeyman of impossible proportions compared to what it actually is.
You claim that "wokeness" is choosing politics before art and I do not that think is true or even a question that can be asked. The philosophy that underlined wokeness was a simple and respectable one. We should be aware that what we consume impacts not only ourselves but the people around us and that these patterns of consumption can lead to injustice at scale. If I consume a piece of media that is connected to industry practices that hurt others, individuals that have engaged in problematic or even violent behavior, or ideas that perpetuate harm to others I need to be AWARE that it is connected to those things. Wokeness never compelled, our morals compel us. Wokeness makes us aware of an inequity, a troubled past and hurt individuals, an industry practice that workers actively complain about, or academic data showing something that is directly harming human society. It is in the face of being presented with these details that our morals compel us to act or not act.
Wokeness exists as a method for humans to proliferate preferences. If I have two burger options and one of them was created by a company that is engaged in horrible farming practices that hurt cows, I know that I don't want to contribute to that action, so I would choose a different burger. If there is a film that was directed by someone with >5+ sexual assault violations, I don't really want to contribute to that persons' success, even if the art that they create is good. We live in the most creatively abundant time the earth has ever seen. I definitely can find something else to watch that will be just as good, if not better, but without me contributing to that director who could use his success to potentially hurt more people. Wokeness is just an idea that you are aware of the consequences of certain behaviors and the externalities that our consumption decisions have.
You claim that "Wokeness" is being wielded violently against it's opponents. No, that's not accurate. Wokeness is not being wielded. People are woke so they see the problematic threads underlying something and then their morals compel them to either support or attack that thing. What you are decrying as hysteria is the same thing that has been done since the dawn of time. There is a group of people with moral preferences that want to have other people behave like them and actively seek to stop people from behaving differently.
What I think your post is specifically complaining about when it comes to wokeness is that if you have different opinions or morals then those that are woke currently, then you will receive social criticism for it. Your more specific claim is that this compels people to not speak their minds and thus dampens the creative output of Hollywood. Please tell me, how is this different than say the Red Scare? The Inquisition? The Salem Witch Trials? There is a group of people in cultural power and they are enforcing their values by wielding social capital. That has literally been the status quo since the dawn of time.
This is also where your idea of being "Anti-Woke" falls apart. Ask anyone from this currently woke group of people what values they prioritize and they would likely give the same values you are ascribing as what's important or close to them. Everyone believes that they are fighting for the right thing and that enables them to use social capital against their foes. Funny enough, you are doing the same thing in this article, as all rhetoricians do.
The point I'm making is that Wokeness is a bogeyman. I will not deny that there are not militant leftists that will use social capital in numbers to punish people who believe differently from them. Let me tell you, I'm only slightly left leaning, and if I spend any time with my conservative family in the south, the same things happen to me. So this is not really some one sided battle that you are fighting for the resistance on.
The facts for most "Anti-Woke" people, as you describe them, are that you have certain values and opinions and others disagree with you. Really, it appears that you are just mad that enough people agree with that criticism of the opinions you hold and you resent their ability to use social capital against you when deciding which preferences to propagate culturally. If people don't agree with the values of a director, let them protest or vote with their dollars. People are allowed to have their own preferences for the people they support and which types of values they are going to propagate or shame. For every person complaining about the woke mob, there is someone that was a victim or a religious, lynch, or fascist mob.
One doesn't get a special pass just because one thinks they do. The world is connected and our actions affect one another. If someone believes your actions to be affecting someone else in a way that their values interpret as negative, they should have the right to vote with their actions, dollars, and words. I think people are just mad now that some of their opinions are not as publicly supported as they once were and that they would face actual consequences for holding them, which, people should be held accountable for.
Disco was killed by a bunch of whiny punks who had been, as the disco youth of the prior generation had been, getting into the edgier sounds of the future and deciding that they didn't like the status quo or what was played on the radio, so they acted out. I'm not going to mythologize a bunch of teenagers doing the teenager thing imaginably. It was not some cultural victory. It was just a generational cohort stepping into the spotlight in it's youth, nothing more, nothing less.
No more Mr. Nice Guy. Move the wokesters to the bottom of your pile.
What happened with Stacey Williams? The story simply died down. Any links explaining why?
Another way to look at it is, "woke" is simply nothing but the political correctness of the 1960s/1970s, but with internet, "smart" phones and social media.
A repeat of the 1980s seems unlikely though. More probable is a repeat of the 1920s and 1930s.