The Eloquence of the Void

Mark Lilla’s Verdict on a Politics Mistaking Slogans for Substance

We live in an age of deafening political noise, a constant barrage of declarations, denunciations, and demands for justice that feel both intensely urgent and strangely weightless. It is a discourse of absolute clarity, where every issue is simplified into a moral binary and every opponent is not merely wrong but malevolent. Yet, beneath this veneer of certainty lies a creeping suspicion: that this very clarity is a symptom of profound superficiality, a substitute for the difficult, nuanced work of actual politics.

It is this modern condition that political theorist Mark Lilla confronts in “The Specter of Superficiality,” diagnosing a liberal movement that has become tragically adept at expressing itself but has forgotten how to persuade, unite, and govern. He argues that in our rush to achieve conceptual purity, we have abandoned the messy, complicated, and essential pursuit of wisdom.

The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish squirting out ink.

George Orwell

A Critique of Superficiality

Mark Lilla’s “The Specter of Superficiality: Why We Mistake Conceptual Clarity for Wisdom” offers a critical examination of contemporary political discourse, focusing on the impact of identity politics on liberal thought. In this work, Lilla argues that an increasing emphasis on superficial clarity in communication has undermined the depth of political engagement, leading to a fragmented liberal movement that struggles to present a unified front against the rise of right-wing populism in America. He contends that while identity politics has brought essential social issues to light, it has also contributed to a dilution of meaningful political dialogue and strategy, preventing liberals from effectively addressing complex societal challenges.