The Courage of Hopelessness

December 11, 2017
Philosopher and cultural critic Žižek (Refugees, Terror and Other Troubles with the Neighbors) continues to offer provocative thoughts on how people should deal with a myriad of daunting challenges, but if his goal is to connect with a wide readership, he will be unsuccessful here. He assumes a greater familiarity with subjects such as the Greek economic crisis than many American readers will possess, and frequently employs academic jargon (e.g., “the Hegelian ‘infinite judgment’ ”). Some of his counterintuitive comments are just asserted, without convincing supportive argumentation, such as his peremptory dismissal of concerns that automation will threaten more and more jobs. These negatives are disappointing, as they overshadow the more cogent contrarian positions in the book, as when Žižek denounces too much activity by progressives as unproductive, and advocates thoughtful self-reflection as a prerequisite for an effective response to the Trump presidency. Žižek also cautions against the erosion of ideological differences on the left in the name of creating a unified front against Trump. Such clear-cut points, however, are accompanied by tendentious ones, such as suggesting that the murderous Khmer Rouge had the positive goal “to effectively change human nature.” This inconsistent book will not help Žižek’s often valid insights reach a larger readership beyond the already-devoted following he enjoys.

December 15, 2017
From the provocative to the outrageous to the impenetrable, the latest from the Slovenian gadfly finds a curious sort of hope in a hopeless situation.Ever since the Chronicle of Higher Education tagged him "the Elvis of cultural theory," iek (Trouble in Paradise: From the End of History to the End of Capitalism, 2015, etc.) has extended his reach well beyond academic circles. He remains even tougher on neoliberalism than he is on authoritarianism, and he takes great delight in counterintuitiveness--and linguistic density. "What I am advocating is not the process of democratic self-purification by means of which we get rid of the dirty water (abuses of democracy) without losing the healthy baby (authentic democracy)," he writes. "The task is rather to trans-value the (democratic) values themselves, to throw out the baby (the democratic form) while keeping in the dirty water (of 'chaotic' popular participation, of large-scale 'authoritarian' decisions)." Got that? When the author writes that "the 2016 elections were the final defeat of liberal democracy," he doesn't seem despondent, because the possibility of great change seems like the healthier response than the return to political business as usual that might have resulted from a Hillary Clinton victory. America lost its big chance, one senses from his writing, when it didn't embrace the real choices that an election race between Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders would have represented, with both benefitting from populist rage. He thinks the danger of Trump has been exaggerated, particularly if the alternative is a retreat from radical change. Here he returns with a twist to the baby-bathwater analogy: "Trump is not the dirty water one should throw out to keep safe the healthy baby of US democracy; he is himself the dirty baby who should be thrown out in order to reveal the true dirty water of social relations that sustain the Clinton consensus." The author rejects conventional wisdom at every turn, occasionally risking nonsense for a higher sense."Resolutely atheist" and a "skeptical pessimist," iek does his best to leave no sacred cow ungored.

COPYRIGHT(2017) Kirkus Reviews, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.