In an era marked by uncertainty—political upheavals, existential crises, and the relentless churn of global events—hope often emerges as a fragile beacon. Yet, as the Apostle Paul asserts in Romans 5:5, “hope does not disappoint us.” This profound declaration invites deeper philosophical inquiry: How can hope, seemingly vulnerable to the whims of reality, evade disappointment? To explore this, we turn to an unlikely convergence of Western post-structuralist theory and Eastern spiritual wisdom. Ernesto Laclau’s concept of the “empty signifier” from discourse theory and the Buddhist notion of shunyata (emptiness) provide complementary lenses. Both emphasize emptiness not as absence or nihilism, but as a generative openness that allows for infinite possibility. By linking these ideas, we can reframe hope as an empty structure—one devoid of rigid content yet brimming with potential—revealing why it inherently resists disappointment.
Ernesto Laclau’s Empty Signifier: A Vessel for Hegemonic Possibility
Ernesto Laclau, the Argentine political theorist, developed the idea of the empty signifier in works such as Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (1985, co-authored with Chantal Mouffe) and Emancipation(s) (1996). Drawing from Saussurean linguistics and Lacanian psychoanalysis, Laclau argues that signifiers (words or symbols) derive meaning not from inherent essence but from their differential relations within a discursive field. An empty signifier arises when a particular term is “emptied” of its specific content to function as a universal nodal point. It becomes a floating vessel that articulates a chain of disparate demands, forging hegemony by representing an absent fullness.
For Laclau, this emptiness is productive. Consider “democracy” or “justice”: these terms lack fixed meaning but absorb the aspirations of diverse groups—workers, minorities, environmentalists—into a cohesive narrative. The signifier’s void allows it to promise completion without being tethered to a singular outcome. If the promise fails in one articulation, the emptiness permits rearticulation, sustaining political momentum. Disappointment, in this view, stems not from the signifier itself but from mistaking its emptiness for a concrete, attainable object. Hope, when viewed as an empty signifier, operates similarly: it carries collective desires without prescribing their form, enabling endless reconfiguration in the face of setbacks.
Buddhist Shunyata: Emptiness as Interdependent Liberation
In Mahayana Buddhism, shunyata—often translated as “emptiness”—is a cornerstone doctrine expounded in texts like Nagarjuna’s Mulamadhyamakakarika (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way) and the Heart Sutra. Shunyata posits that all phenomena lack inherent, independent existence (svabhava). Things appear solid and self-contained, but upon analysis, they are interdependent, arising from causes and conditions in a web of pratityasamutpada(dependent origination). Emptiness is not voidness or negation but the absence of intrinsic essence, which liberates beings from attachment and suffering (dukkha).
The Heart Sutra famously declares, “Form is emptiness, emptiness is form.” This paradox underscores that emptiness is form’s true nature—dynamic, fluid, and free from fixation. Attachment to phenomena as “real” breeds disappointment when they inevitably change or dissolve. Shunyata invites a shift: by recognizing emptiness, one cultivates equanimity and compassion, seeing potential in every moment. Hope, through this lens, is not a clinging to desired outcomes but an embrace of impermanence. It does not disappoint because it arises from the empty ground of reality, unattached to illusions of permanence.
Bridging the Concepts: Emptiness as the Ground of Undisappointing Hope
At first glance, Laclau’s empty signifier and shunyata seem worlds apart—one rooted in secular political theory, the other in spiritual metaphysics. Yet, both converge on emptiness as a site of radical openness. Laclau’s signifier is “empty” because it transcends particularity to enable universal articulation; shunyata reveals all things as empty to dissolve delusions of separateness. This linkage illuminates hope’s resilience.
Imagine hope as an empty signifier in Laclau’s terms: it signifies an absent fullness, a “better future” that unites varied yearnings—personal fulfillment, social justice, ecological harmony—without dictating specifics. If a particular hope (e.g., a political revolution) falters, the emptiness allows repositioning: new demands fill the void, sustaining the hegemonic chain. Disappointment occurs only when hope is misrecognized as a filled signifier—tied to a rigid ideology or outcome—that crumbles under contingency.
Shunyata deepens this by grounding emptiness in ontology. Hope, as empty, mirrors the interdependent nature of existence. Buddhist thinkers like Thich Nhat Hanh describe hope as potentially illusory if attached, leading to despair. But true hope, infused with shunyata, is non-dual: it acknowledges suffering while affirming boundless potential. Without inherent essence, hope cannot “fail” because it lacks a fixed self to disappoint. Instead, it flows with conditions, manifesting in unexpected ways.
This synthesis echoes Paul’s biblical assurance. In Christian theology, hope is eschatological—pointing to divine fulfillment beyond human grasp. Linking it to Laclau and shunyata, we see hope as empty yet pregnant: a signifier/shunyata that invites faith without guarantees, thriving on its very lack. Empirical examples abound. In social movements like the Arab Spring or Black Lives Matter, initial “failures” did not extinguish hope; its emptiness allowed rearticulation into ongoing struggles. Similarly, in personal realms, meditative practices rooted in shunyata transform dashed hopes into wisdom, revealing that disappointment arises from grasping, not from hope itself.
Implications for Contemporary Life
In a world of climate anxiety, economic precarity, political authoritarianism and digital disillusionment, this linked framework offers practical solace. By treating hope as an empty signifier/shunyata/ kenotic , we avoid the pitfalls of optimism (blind positivity) or pessimism (resigned closure). Instead, hope becomes a practice: articulating desires politically ( Laclau) while cultivating non-attachment spiritually ( Buddhism). Activists can rally around empty symbols like “change” without ideological rigidity, reducing burnout. Individuals, facing loss, can embrace emptiness to find renewal—hope’s form shifts, but its essence (or lack thereof) endures.
Critics might argue this view risks passivity, but both Laclau and shunyata emphasize action: the former through hegemonic contestation, the latter through skillful means (upaya). Hope, emptied, motivates without deluding. We can indeed interpret Christ as an empty signifier, using the theology of Kenosis of St. Paul. Christ’s emptiness is indeed fullness of humanity and divinity. This is why Jesus is our hope that does not disappoints.
Conclusion
Ernesto Laclau’s empty signifier and Buddhist shunyata converge to reveal hope’s profound secret: its emptiness is its strength. Far from a hollow promise, this void enables infinite articulation and interdependent arising, ensuring hope does not disappoint. As we navigate an unpredictable world, embracing this emptiness transforms hope from a fragile wish into an unshakeable force—one that, in its very lack, fulfills. In the words of the Heart Sutra, “Gone, gone, gone beyond, gone altogether beyond,” hope carries us forward, ever renewed
