It makes the term kind of useless, wouldn't you think? It's a placeholder term for whatever you don't like.
And it is far from useless. IMO it accurately labels people who are either: 1. Taking liberal talking points to extremes for the sole purpose of attention seeking or 2. Naive, coming of age youth bumping against reality for the first time in their lives and use the distraction of politics and remote injustices to avoid confronting the "hard work" which will be required to thrive in the adult world.
I try to be charitable in my assumptions, but even then, it's hard to argue that it's safe to criticize any DIE or "woke" initiative. There always seems to be some risk in being fired/blacklisted or otherwise attacked for even modest criticism of the DIE movement.
I'm not convinced of those arguments. However, assuming I'm being charitable (which I will try to be to my utmost) and take these to be true, it's quite possible the right is correct when it comes to the worst excesses of "wokeism". Nothing about "they pick extreme examples" or "they foment a sense of grievances" means they are incorrect. Even if the problem is overstated, I still see it as a problem.
It is not "a placeholder term for whatever you don't like", not in any meaningful sense.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke
[2]: [Why Wokeism Will Rule the World](https://archive.fo/OaowM)