The Paradox of Hope in Liquid Modernity: Social Transformations and the Value Space of Contemporary Europe
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21847/2411-3093.2026.818Keywords:
Hope, Ernst Bloch, Concrete Utopia, Secularization, Social Transformation, Prefigurative Politics, Collective Agency, SocietyAbstract
This article examines Ernst Bloch's radical transformation of hope from its theological to its secular-utopian form through a distinctly socio-philosophical lens. Beginning with an analysis of how Augustinian-Thomistic hope functioned as an ideological mechanism that deferred justice to an otherworldly realm while stabilizing earthly hierarchies, the article traces the crisis of transcendent hope in modernity and identifies Martin Luther's dialectic of the hidden God (deus absconditus) as the crucial conceptual bridge to Bloch's philosophy. Bloch's ontology of the Not-Yet relocates hope within immanent, material processes, distinguishing between anticipatory "waking dreams" (Tagträume) that orient toward real possibilities and compensatory fantasies that defer transformation. The article explores Bloch's concept of concrete utopia – grounded in actual historical tendencies through docta spes (educated hope) – and its influence on liberation theology and social movements of the 1960s-70s. Critical examination reveals three fundamental challenges: the fragmentation of the revolutionary subject after 1989, the totalitarian dangers when utopian hope hardens into ideology, and the theodicy problem of sustaining hope without metaphysical guarantees. Contemporary analysis demonstrates how late capitalism colonizes futurity itself, yet new movements – from climate justice to solidarity economies – practice prefigurative politics that embody Blochian hope as democratic praxis. The article argues that Bloch is not simply overcoming but radically inheriting Christian eschatology's messianic structure, relocating it from transcendence to immanence, from divine grace to collective human agency, creating a hope adequate to our post-religious yet deeply utopian-needing age.
Downloads
References
Aquinas, T. (1947). Summa theologica (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.). Benziger Brothers.
Arendt, H. (1973). The origins of totalitarianism (New ed.). Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Augustine. (1950). The city of God (M. Dods, Trans.). Modern Library. (Original work published ca. 426)
Augustine. (1991). Confessions (H. Chadwick, Trans.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published ca. 400)
Avendaño Manzanares, J. L. (2018). Theodicy in light of theologia crucis: Martin Luther before the mystery of human suffering [Doctoral thesis, University of St. Mi-chael’s College]. Scholaris. Retrieved from https://utoronto.scholaris.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/25a030aa-fd66-4cf4-afc5-12a7a0162b7e/content
Berger, P. L. (1967). The sacred canopy: Elements of a sociological theory of religion. Doubleday.
Bloch, E. (1959). Das Prinzip Hoffnung (Vols. 1–3). Suhr-kamp.
Bloch, E. (2009). Atheism in Christianity: The religion of the Exodus and the Kingdom (J. T. Swann, Trans.). Verso. (Original work published 1968) Retrieved from https://files.libcom.org/files/ernst-bloch-atheism-in-christianity.compressed.pdf
Blöser, C., & Stahl, T. (2022). Hope. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2022 ed.). Stanford University. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hope/
Boldyrev, I. (2023). Ernst Bloch. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2023 ed.). Stanford University. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/bloch/
Castoriadis, C. (1987). The imaginary institution of society (K. Blamey, Trans.). MIT Press. (Original work pub-lished 1975)
Durkheim, É. (1994). Die elementaren Formen des religiösen Lebens (L. Voss, Trans.). Suhrkamp. (Origi-nal work published 1912)
Eagleton, T. (2015). Hope without optimism. Yale University Press.
Jameson, F. (2003). Future city. New Left Review, (21), 65–79. Retrieved from https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii21/articles/fredric-jameson-future-city
Koselleck, R. (1979). Vergangene Zukunft: Zur Semantik geschichtlicher Zeiten. Suhrkamp.
Marx, K. (1956). Zur Kritik der Hegelschen Rechtsphiloso-phie: Einleitung. In Marx-Engels-Werke (Vol. 1, pp. 378–391). Dietz Verlag. (Original work published 1844) Retrieved from https://marx-wirklich-studieren.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/mew_band01.pdf
Moltmann, J. (2017). Theology of hope. Orthodox Theology. (Original work published 1964) Retrieved from https://orthodox-theology.com/media/PDF/4.2017/JuergenMoltmann.pdf
Münz-Koenen, I. (1997). Konstruktion des Nirgendwo: Die Utopie-Debatte um Ernst Bloch. Akademie Verlag.
Nietzsche, F. (1994). Die fröhliche Wissenschaft (Book 3, §125). Reclam [9388]. (Original work published 1882)
Siebers, J. (2019). Philosophy as Rhetoric. Revue interna-tionale de philosophie, 289(3), 361-374. https://doi.org/10.3917/e.rip.289.0361.
Siebers, J. (2021). Creativity and the ontology of not-yet being. Siebers, Johan. (2021). Creativity and the Ontol-ogy of Not-Yet Being. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198806820.013.10
Solnit, R. (2016). Hope in the dark: Untold histories, wild possibilities (3rd ed.). Haymarket Books. (Original work published 2004)
Stratton-Lake, P. (n.d.). Hope. In Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy. Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/hope/v-1/sections/hope-in-blochs-thought
Troeltsch, E. (1912). Die Soziallehren der christlichen Kirchen und Gruppen. J.C.B. Mohr.
Tsing, A. L. (2015). The mushroom at the end of the world: On the possibility of life in capitalist ruins. Princeton University Press.
Weber, M. (1905). Die protestantische Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus. Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik. Retrieved from https://homepage.univie.ac.at/henning.schluss/seminare/2016-SS/Potsdam-Bi-po/TExte/Weber-Protestantische-Ethik.pdf
Weber, M. (1992). Politik als Beruf. Reclam [9388]. (Original work published 1919)
Zimmermann, R. E. (Ed.). (2016). Ernst Bloch: Das Prinzip Hoffnung. De Gruyter.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ронні Клозе

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
1. Authors bear responsibility for the accuracy of facts, quotations, numbers and names used.
2. Manuscripts are not sent back.
3. The publisher does not always agree with the authors' opinion.
4. The authors reserve the right to authorship of the work and pass the first publication right of this work to the journal under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. This license allows others to distribute (copy) the published work for non-commercial purposes, provided there is mandatory attribution to its authors and a link to the first publication in our journal.
5. The authors have the right to conclude separate supplement agreements that relate to non-exclusive work distribution in the form in which it has been published by the journal (for example, to upload the work to the online storage of the journal or publish it as part of a monograph), provided that the reference to the first publication of the work in this journal is included.