Productive teams understand that any "way of working" is just a means to an end, and that good teams find a way to work that suits them (and their situation).

"Individuals and interactions over processes and tools" as the Agile Manifesto would call it. Quite different from having a certified scrum master

Certified Scrum Masters are individuals who need jobs.

Then they should get a different job.

“Agile” needs to stop existing.

Agile just means making it up as you go when you have people who don't have the knowledge or experience to define first exactly what is required. If more programmers became managers and could work with the stakeholders, most specifically the clients that are ultimately paying their salaries then there would be fewer problems with waterfall. My experience is that if programmers would read the design document written by people who are knowledgeable instead of wanting to build it on the fly there would be no need for agile (assuming experienced people are writing the design documents. After ~1998-2000 it seems like marketing and sales were the ones that ended up doing that despite having no education or experience in designing software interfaces let alone programming). But that's just my experience, and I learned early on the first thing you do is read the manual and if it doesn't answer all the questions then ask and re-write the manual yourself before doing any budgeting or coding. Instead we got agile, which turned into make it up as you go through constant sprints/iterations and meetings as you design and build it rather than on paper. As comic Dave Smith said, if you say it works on paper but doesn't in practice then it doesn't work on paper either.

Usually you know the least at the start so your plans at that point are rubbish. So you keep refining your plans .....

Who gets to do things that they have experience in all the time? Not me at lest. And what manual do you read ? There's almost never anyone who understands it all quite apart from having written "a manual".

Rebranding wouldn't help. The same people doing Fauxagile will be doing FauxX after. The underlying issues of why Fauxagile exists don't get removed because of rebranding