I would start by saying that there is nothing revolutionary or unprecedented about the current social-political climate. The sixties and seventies, the world over, were far more radicalised, with far more people engaged and active. And it was after this period, where the fizzle kicked in, that the politics employed by and large today found their roots (i.e. third wave feminism).

I would argue that those caught up in this fervour are not becoming more aware of power structures, because their class consciousness has not been activated in any meaningful way. Instead, their political fervour, which stems from a general discontentment and disillusion with the status quo, a thing that can actually be harnessed productively, is being distracted and pointed in the direction of petite-bourgeois identity politics. No part of the political identity of this "movement" threatens or even questions Capitalism and the material conditions which are responsible for all inequity.

I would argue that this a "movement" (I use the term begrudgingly) that is also destined to ultimately fail on all fronts, and lead to another wave of disillusioned youth. This is because the foundations of the politics that guide the movement are based in ideology, as opposed to the material. What little materialism there is subjugates itself to the ideological (i.e. patriarchy theory). And most importantly this is because there is no programme, no plan of action, no leadership, no tangible goal or a means to that goal.

If you took a hundred random people who subscribe to these politics and asked them how they hope to achieve equality, they simply would not have an answer that wasn't abstract.

And when we move into the latter stages of this movements development we see its imminent implosion as its positions fracture, back pedal on themselves, betray each other, and fall flat. We are already starting to see this in the rebuke of "appropriation," where the prevailing undertone of their arguments are bleeding into segregation territory. We are already starting to see it on trans issues, particularly with regard to trans men - who feminists regularly commit to erasure. We're starting to see this implosion with regard to racism (i.e. it is being made a "white oppression" as opposed to a ruling class oppression, and that has lead to a total misfire on the race relations all over the world).

And looking at it in its context, in the material foundations of the "movement," is it any surprise that it is this disjointed and this prepared to self-destruct? Its primary foundations are in schools and universities, and are heavily influenced by middle class feminism, alienated from the conditions of the real world, spawned in an academic vacuum.

This is not a movement that is sufficiently large enough, or sufficiently cohesive enough, to produce the shake up you imagine. But even if it were, it would implode before it managed to do any good.

There is always revolutionary potential to be tapped. As Socialists, it's half the reason we invest so heavily in any social movement. We seek to engage them, so that they can engage others, and grow the class consciousness of workers. But is this movement itself carrying untapped revolutionary potential? Not even remotely.