A Critical Response to Žižek’s Analysis of Trump
Reza Gholami
Faculty Member, Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies
March 30, 2026
In a January 2026 article published on his Substack, Slavoj Žižek described Trump as “an authoritarian without authority” — someone who holds power but lacks the quiet dignity and inner legitimacy that real authority requires. As a psychological portrait, this is interesting. As political analysis, it suffers from a fundamental methodological error: it directs attention to the window display and leaves what is behind it in the dark.
Trump Was Chosen, Not Discovered
Trump did not emerge from a vacuum. He was deliberately selected by a specific current within American politics. This current operates on a clear strategic assumption: America is a declining empire, and the only way to stop that decline is through raw, unapologetic force. For this group, multilateral diplomacy and the language of human rights are not tools of power — they are signs of weakness. Bloodshed during the “surgery” is an unavoidable cost, not a tragedy.
This current did not need Trump because he was smart or had a coherent plan. It needed him because he had three qualities at once: the ability to absorb all media attention, ambition without accountability, and the capacity to carry all the blame on behalf of the entire movement. For this group, Trump is not a leader. He is a shield.
Using Christianity to Justify Violence
One of the most overlooked tools of this current is its instrumental use of Christianity. Trump, a figure whose personal life contradicts Christian values at nearly every turn, has nonetheless become the champion of conservative Christians. Žižek notices this paradox but explains it through individual psychology. The structural reality goes deeper. Key architects of Project 2025 were open Christian nationalists who designed programs for domestic militarization across all fifty states — not just at the borders. This current uses Christianity not as faith, but as a weapon of legitimacy — a theological cover for violence that would otherwise be indefensible. When Trump looked to the sky at a national prayer event in 2025 and claimed God had saved him from assassination to make America great again, that was not the language of a politician. That was the language of someone who believes he carries a divine mission — and therefore that any violence in its service is permitted.
Where Žižek Goes Wrong
When Žižek spends pages analyzing why Trump gets angry about not receiving the Nobel Peace Prize, he unintentionally does exactly what this current wants: analytical attention moves toward the personality, and the structure behind it stays safe. The real strategic question is not why Trump behaves the way he does. The real question is: if Trump leaves the stage tomorrow, who will this current put in his place?
History has already answered this. Movements built on the logic of imperial decline and the necessity of open violence do not depend on a single face. They produce faces, use them, and replace them when needed.
The Real Danger
The real danger is that the world spends its analytical energy on the personality of one actor, while the current behind him quietly reshapes institutions, shifts regional balances, and prepares the ground for the decades ahead.
Žižek is right that Trump’s words should not be dismissed as mere performance. But a psychoanalytic focus on one personality, without analyzing the structure of the movement that produced and sustains him, is an incomplete answer to a complete question. As long as the actor remains the center of analysis rather than the structure, this current will remain safe. And that is the most expensive cost that flawed analysis can impose on the world.
References
Žižek, S. (2026, January 31). The Need for a Colonoscopy of Donald Trump. Slavoj Žižek’s Substack. https://slavoj.substack.com/p/the-need-for-a-colonoscopy-of-donald