{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03894359892569382, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006714413607878245, 'mean_word_length': 4.54590570719603, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Book Review: Guido De Graaff, Politics in Friendship: A Theological Account

imperial logic of Egypt. Joseph is finally saved from the vitiating allure of the ‘politics of power’ when he reidentifies with his people, and, more importantly, when he eschews the divine pretensions of power: ‘Do not be afraid! Am I in the place of God?’ (Gen. 45:19). ‘The dreamer really returns only after Joseph lets go of the empire and its seduction of power and embraces instead the power of the dream’ (p. 166). Boesak then returns to the framing figures of the book, Mandela and Obama. In old age, according to Boesak, Mandela reclaimed the dream of ‘a new South Africa’ (p. 169) characterised not by power, violence and injustice, but by Ubuntu—fellow humanity. While avoiding hagiography, Boesak nevertheless paints a picture of an aging Mandela who managed to find a hope forged in pain and struggle. Pointedly, the narrative of Joseph’s struggle to maintain ‘the dream’, and of Mandela’s recapturing of the dream, are offered as a call and a challenge to President Obama: ‘If President Obama can return to the people and call on them for help in his struggle against Republicans to stop short of a “fiscal cliff” ... why doesn’t he call on them for help on the greater, more fundamental issues of ending the wars, eradicating poverty, and creating systemic justice?’ (p. 172). The point is crystal clear: will Obama remain a ‘son of the Empire’? Or will he give up the politics of power and reclaim the hopeful vision that he once promised to the world? This book is about what it means to maintain hope in the midst of politics. The reader who is interested in a careful philosophical analysis of hope and politics would be advised to look elsewhere. This book is for the reader who desires to see a more just, equitable and peaceful civic order—and who is struggling to maintain even a shred of hope in its pursuit. Such a reader will find encouragement to hope, not in politics itself, but to maintain hope in the midst of politics. What Boesak offers is a thoroughly theological, and ultimately Christological, account of hope that promises to shape and sustain political engagement in the pursuit of ‘justice, peace, and equity’ (p. 21).