labels that the people you were labeling didn’t even like
This is a silly criticism. "Latinx" and similar terms were used by some US kids of Latin-American descent and those people felt the "X"-ed words provided them better representation. Many native Spanish speakers didn't feel represented and objected to the terms being applied to them. So: there were two (maybe even more???) groups of people and they didn't agree on one label being applied to both of them.
It doesn't make sense to say that this is a problem with "woke" (wtf does that even mean) because the "non-woke" alternative is to use labels that people don't like... exactly the thing you're complaining woke did wrong. It's not a change making us worse off, it's just a failure to deliver total success. (Maybe it failed to deliver even partial success here? That's a conversation that might be worth having, but "worse off" seems like a straight hallucination.)
Now, if you want to say, "I have a big criticism of progressive movements: they do not succeed to the degree that they promise!" then sure. You should get in line behind literally every person who has ever considered themselves progressive, because all of them have also come up with this brilliant piece of insight and are eager to share it.
Oh OK. Murdering rich people might effect social change. Though I'm skeptical because not a lot of people actually do it, which is an important component of that change.
I think you still end up coming around in a circle: in your fantasy of mob-justice, what prevents the wealthy from ending up being the ones who control it? (Like Vlad the Impaler!)