Compared to levels of 2001-2003, the jingoism knob was definitely turned down. Even the popularity of "America first" is an indication thereof: people are no longer interested in forcible export of democracy and American power abroad. The Zeitgeist of the Bush era was one of empire building. The Zeitgeist of the current era is one of de-globalization. This is a huge difference. The former one was certainly more bloody.

As to the woke, whose self-definitions you seem to be taking at face value. (Why?)

Tell me how destroying an old man's career over a 33 years old article [1] can be labeled as an increase in empathy, tolerance and understanding.

Or running a Twitter death gauntlet on a random Mexican driver [2].

These incidents embody "wokeness" to me, not a nicely sounding definition that was constructed to make the movement look better than it actually is.

You seem to put a lot of trust into nicely sounding definitions. Always look at practice: do those people practice what they preach?

Anyone can put together nicely sounding definitions and theories. In theory (= the Constitution), the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, where I grew up, had solid protections of personal freedoms and human rights. In practice, it didn't. It was a totalitarian state that just didn't want to state "we rule you and we will crush any dissent" in writing.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-resignation-idUSKB...

[2] https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/sdge-worker-fired-ove...