What is a Wokoso?

illustraion of a young light-skinned person on social mesi while people in the background are actually working

Wokoso

Pronunciation: woh-KOH-soh

Definition: A person who performs social awareness—particularly around Indigenous, racial, or decolonial issues—without the lived experience, historical grounding, or community accountability to back it up. The wokoso mistakes enthusiasm for expertise and often ends up doing more harm than good, typically through lateral attacks on their own people rather than confronting actual systems of oppression.

Etymology: A fusion of woke (in its original sense of being socially and racially conscious—not the right-wing weaponization of the term) and mocoso (Mexican Spanish for “snotty-nosed kid,” denoting naivety, inexperience, or someone who hasn’t yet matured past childhood impulses). The combination captures someone who has adopted the language of consciousness but lacks the wisdom and experiential grounding that comes from years of study, ceremony, community work, and honest self-reflection.

The term emerged partly in response to a growing trend of wack scholarship coming out of academia—work that positions itself as progressive or decolonial while reinforcing anti-Chicano and anti-Indigenous narratives. This should not be confused with journalist Gustavo Arellano’s employment of similar terminology, which operates from a different political orientation altogether—one that often punches at progressive movements without centering a white supremacy analysis. Our usage is specific to Indigenous reclamation spaces and names a pattern of lateral violence, not a dismissal of social consciousness itself.

Usage Context: A particular pattern shows up in Indigenous reclamation spaces, social justice circles, and increasingly in academic settings: individuals who acquire surface-level knowledge—often from social media, a few books, or brief workshop experiences—and then weaponize that incomplete understanding against their own community members. Rather than incorporating a white supremacy analysis into their stances (or even demonstrating the capacity to do so), wokosos punch laterally or downward at fellow Indigenous people, Chicanos, or others doing the actual work—leaving the real structures of oppression untouched.

We were all new to this path once. The distinction lies in the spirit behind the action. The wokoso substitutes ego for humility, performance for practice, and social media clout for community accountability. Their motivations tend toward satisfying emotional and individualistic whims rather than serving the collective.

They speak with authority they haven’t earned and often cause harm by spreading misinformation dressed in Indigenous aesthetics. What marks the wokoso is a vindictive, unskilled, and emotionally driven approach, a clever weaponization of identity politics and social justice concepts, combined with an unwillingness to consider advice from elders or OGs in the movement. They would rather double down than humble themselves.

Related Concepts: Optical Indigeneity (superficial/performative Indigenous identity), Dirty Medicine (teachings presented as healing but actually harmful), Lateral Oppression (attacking those beside you instead of those above you in the power structure).

Wokoso Examples

  1. Accusing Chicanos of “Mexican hegemony” while we remain underrepresented across major media, political institutions, and social sectors. 
  2. Platforming critiques of Chicano identity on gentrifier-leaning publications behind paywalls, in English, while claiming to speak for immigrant or Indigenous communities with limited access to that very content.
  3. Centering their critique on working-class Chicanos reclaiming huaraches or Nahuatl names while staying silent on corporations profiting off Indigenous aesthetics. The real extractors escape the smoke.
  4. Deploying terms like “decolonization” or “Indigenous sovereignty” as rhetorical shields while producing content that reinforces division among Mesoamerican-descended peoples.
  5. Dismissing 25+ years of community organizing, ceremony, and cultural work because it doesn’t align with their recently acquired academic framework. 
  6. Talking down on Chicanos—partaking in a long Amerikkkan tradition of anti-Mexican, anti-Chicano sentiment—while simultaneously benefiting from the spaces, platforms, and civil rights gains our movements fought for.
  7. Hiding behind identity politics to deflect accountability. Wielding their gender, immigration status, or ethnic background as a shield against legitimate critique—as if shared marginalization exempts them from being called out for lateral violence against their own people.
  8. Barking about Indigenous authenticity while exhibiting zero Native teachings or community conflict protocols in their approach—likely because they don’t actually represent any real Indigenous community. 
  9. Centering White-Black American exceptionalism paradigms in their racial analysis—erasing Brown people from the conversation entirely. Example: Calling a brown Chicano a “non-Black Chicano.”
  10. Utilizing proximity to whiteness and catering to the white gaze to infer credibility, while holding no actual power, accountability, or representative status with any land-based community or people. Then, getting mad when you don’t concede an argument solely based on their inferred status.
About the author

Miguel Quimichipilli Bravo— Chicano-P'urhepecha from Venice, CA. Native-Indigenous spiritual activist, educator, lettering artist, musician, and Native spiritual run organizer since 2002. http://spiritrun.ws/
[presto_player id="6079"]