That's a cheap talking point, though, isn't it? I don't think you're accounting for something I pointed out in the article. If I showed the same DNA of wokeness (infantilized fragility and unearned condescension), I'd have complained to Medium about those comments I received, and acted like a self-entitled "Karen" to use systems of power to get that person into trouble. I didn't do that, so there's a big difference between me and the person who banned me and got my article taken down.

Something else you're ignoring is how the word "woke" acquired a new meaning--as happens all the time in every language. Languages are organic, so their words change meaning. The original meaning you're talking about isn't objectionable. I'm talking about the newly acquired pejorative sense of "wokeness" that applies to how the old type of behaviour evolved.

Anyway, I don't need to be woke in the new, pejorative sense to empathize with underclasses or victimized minorities. My empathy is based on secular humanism, existentialism, and a cosmic philosophical perspective.

The question I'd raise is whether the new kind of wokesters, such as the commenter I write about in this article are as dignified as the secular humanists who think cosmically rather than tribally, and who eschew social-media-exacerbated identity politics. There's nothing dignified about being infantilized by social media.