In this response, I address five selective arguments in relation to Malherbe’s thesis on the implication of the unconscious in the structuring of our political orientations and activities, and the importance of engaging in a process of unconsciousness-raising. First, I raise a seeming conceptual tension in his argument about the relationship between conscious and unconscious activity. Second, I highlight the challenge of occupying a range of subject positions and how their associated multiple unconscious lack(s) may compromise solidarity in political formations. Third, I suggest that surrendering individual unconscious needs to that of the group is a more troublesome process than we anticipate, as it is always ideologically contested, both consciously and unconsciously. Fourth, I argue that unconsciousness-raising is not in and of itself implicitly connected to a specific set of political goals, as the unconscious is not inherently politically partisan, and I consequently conclude with the suggestion that the very idea of solidarity is an unstable and dynamic construct and process.