This is an interesting article on issues of activism, but I think the tendency to wrong analysis springs from (over-)analysis itself. Here Zizek attempts to revinvent a theory of time, but can this work: I don’t know, and don’t understand it. There is no mystery to the stalled activism effect. 1. Bolshevism failed. 2. the left is still using the same terms of discourse, however. 3.marxism is not tuned to neo-classical economics and talks into a void. dialectical materialism is a millstone around…4.the failure of Bolshevism puts the discourse of the old left into limbo…and so on.
I think that a new let will arrive rapidly if a new discourse can be invented: the OWS did that, and there was an explosion. But its thinking was preprogrammed to fail: the anarchist element was the key to success, as an innovation, and its failure, as a woolly thesis of change through magical thinking: nice guys without leaders will produce miraculous changes above from below, by doing not much of anything except denouncing leaders.
The issue of climate change is a good point of focus: but how will we deal with this issue if we don’t have a global movement that can control global capitalism?
In general the old left persists in trying to repeat the success of the Second Internationale, but that won’t work. But its core was essentially right.