Right wingers need an adversary by which to define themselves. It’s the moral outrage that keeps them going. Yes, there’s an extent to which they call themselves “anti woke” because it’s more socially acceptable than “bigot.” But it also serves the purpose of propping up the straw bogeyman that sustains their whole movement.

Because dog whistles sound more acceptable than coming out and admitting they’re racist motherfuckers.

A mix of “willfully ignorant”, “narcissism”, and “intolerance”.

Just a reminder: the actual Nazis never said their goal was to steal from and murder a bunch of Jewish people while they were still seeking power.

They did say they were against the “International Jewry” that was pulling the strings behind all the world’s governments and controlling all the media and manipulating the populace with their “lying press” (aka “fake news.”) They also said gay people were groomers. Does any of this sound familiar?

The fascist must always position their self as the defender of the free world, of stability, of decency, of natural values, of a natural hierarchy…

and they must always invent an attacker who seeks to forcefully, tyrannically rob society of everything they know and love.

Without an attacker (who can be slandered), the fascist would need to defend the actual value of their own positions against level-headed, logical scrutiny.

The fascist ideology can survive a violent foe: all you need to do is vilify them, murder them, or throw them into death camps.

It cannot survive logic.

So they need to stop people from ever looking at the ideology through a logical lens.

Anti-woke as umbrella term because having to remember what exactly they’re “representing” is hard?

“general dumbassery” is the best explanation