Can global capitalist democracy have a human face?

At first glance, the question 'is global capitalist democracy with a human face enough?' doesn't help much to open up thinking about the dilemmas of the present. One way to approach its limits and maybe put it to work is by breaking the implicit claims apart, word by word.

Global: since the global is not the world or even a world insofar as antagonism is Real, the question begins with the fantasy of a totality, a fantasy that the next term, capitalist, either reinforces as ideology or ruptures as Real. Thus, the next term

Capitalist: already contradicts and calls into question the first as well as the second, unless

Democracy: remains but an empty signifier.  After all, there isn't an institution for a global democracy; democracy and capitalism are incompatible; democracy isn't global in its theory or practice.

Human: is rather shocking in contexts of homo sacer, the critique of human rights, and the ongoing critical engagements with the anthropomorphic machine. In fact, it's so counter to Zizek's anti-humanism (what kind of neighbor is the human neighbor, anyway?) that it seems part of a phrase constructed for radio (tertiary orality?), especially when we recall his critical responses to Levinas's

Face.

And

Enough: for what? For a slogan? A platform? An aspiration? Ideological formations combine dissonant and even contradictory ideas. We could then imagine left responses to the question (or, differently put, the implied left enunciating position): "yes, that's enough for us!"  We could be so fortunate to live in such a wonderful world!

Is it enough because its impossibility sustains desire? enough because the ideal lets us keep enjoying: global! capitalist! democracy! these are all the best goodies! the political equivalent of a chocolate chocolate chip cookie (why the combination of chocolates?). Those who are left out, excluded from or deprived of any of the three, have something to fight for. The obvious incompatibility and emptiness is surefire protection against Laclau-inspired critique. Or maybe the slogan, global capitalist democracy with a human face!, is a slogan for the multitude (and a lot easier to swallow than the joy of being communist!).