I would be nice if you critiqued an actual well thought out 'wokester' rather than pursued an extended straw-man argument. My observation is the opposite. The wokester accepts agency and hence a responsibility for they impact of their actions. Awaking to the way, oh say, racism is baked into our language, institutions, and our implicit assumptions creates an extension of awareness and hence an extension of agency and responsibility.
I would guess the number of social justice activists that have read Archeology of Knowledge is probably close to zero. Nor do I see Foucault's relevance to any of this beyond the shared root technique of 'bracketing' the truth or falsity of a particular text to examine additional levels of meaning. (Not that a lot of academics haven't taken that over the top. Still, starting back with Husserl, the grandfather of bracketing, but also threaded through even Foucault (most of the time) is a solid assumption in the value of evidence and analysis.)
So wokesters and Foucault. Great, your straw man has two heads unrelated, as far as I can tell, beyond the fact they both irritate you.
Perhaps you'd care to actually reference some of these evil folks that believe we need to wake up to the unintended impact of our actions and aim the Götzen-Dämmerung at something that might actually ring either hollow or true.