I always thought that the younger crew was meant to make Picard being old an easier pill to swallow for the woke generation. "The Picard show! With a young, hip main cast!" It's very nu-trrekky.
What on Earth would a young cast have to do with "woke-ness?"
Also the cast really isn't that young. Allison Pill is 36; Isa Briones is 23; Evan Evagora is 25; Michelle Hurd is 55; Santiago Cabrera is 43; Harry Treadaway is 37; and Orla Brady is 61.
So Cabrera is just 3 years younger than Stewart was when TNG premiered, Hurd is almost 10 years older than Stewart was in TNG S1, and Brady is almost 15 years older than Stewart was in TNG S1.
(And that, of course, is to say nothing of returning stars Jeri Ryan [54], Brent Spiner [73], Whoopi Goldberg [66], and John de Lancie [74].)
So I really don't think the cast is all that young. You've got two people in their 20s, two people in their 30s, one person in his 40s, two people in their 50s, two people in their 60s, two people in their 70s, and the star in his 80s.
I could see an argument that having a cast that's so diverse in age is "woke" just because you've literally got cast members in almost every decade of adult life, but that's as far as I'd go with that. And I don't even think that was intentional -- I think it just ended up working out that way because so much of PIC as a narrative is about Jean-Luc looking back on his life and building relationships as a result of his age and coming to terms with his mortality.
Why don't any of the post-ENT cast have a boner for Archer?
I mean, from an in-universe perspective, Archer and the NX-01 would probably be seen as more important since Archer is basically the Federation's George Washington. But the real reason, of course, is that the audience still loves William Shatner's Kirk, whereas Scott Bakula's Archer was an absolute wet blanket.