This article hypothesizes that the work of Ernesto Laclau is a proposal that aims to be a review, in times of crisis, to the very idea of criticism. Throughout the years, this thinker has defended his proposal for radical democracy to different remarks and rants. In these pages, we propose resuming talks between Laclau and Slavoj Zizek as one of the possible ways to address this debate. Given the difficulty of providing an exhaustive answer to the main question in our debate, we have raised the issue in terms of the "risks" or "dangers" that the work of Laclau approaches, while avoiding definitive statements.
