This discussion examines what is the meaning of the concept of ideology and tries different approaches to answering this question. However, this term is very commonly used in the academic sphere but many researchers tend to use it in different ways be it pejorative or meliorative. It is considered a ‘notorious pedigree’. It comes from the Greek; idea ‘form, pattern’ and the term ‘logos’ which denotes a discourse or compilation. An ideology can be understood as a theoretical approach trying to explain what is out there.
Firstly the following essay explores how the term ideology came from a scientific approach and developed debates. The discussion moves on to the meaning of ideology nowadays. Finally, it examines the debate over the possible ‘end of ideology’. The concluding discussion notes that because of… that…
First of all, the term ideology according to a social-scientific viewpoint corresponds to a set of ideas that provides a basis for organized political action, whether this is intended to preserve, modify, or overthrow the existing system of power relationships. We can relate this definition to the one of Antoine Destutt de Tracy who was the first to coin the term « ideology » at the end of the 18th century. However, he had a specific idea of what was an ideology. First, he understood it as a new empirical science of ideas. According to him, this new science was la theorie des theories and had an impact on other sciences since it necessarily preceded all other sciences, which of necessity utilized ‘ideas’. This shows that Dan ideally was supposed to be the supreme science and theory that would help rational entities to understand and live in their present world. However, this is arguable because it would assume that ideologues were the ones able to understand this and more suitable to retain power. This perception was not well perceived by Napoleon Bonaparte who maintained a hostile relationship with the ideologues accusing them of fomenting political unrest. In this aspect, we can see that it created debate among political actors. Some might even say that he seemed to suffer from ‘ideophobia’- pejorative use of ideology indicating intellectual sterility, practical ineptitude, and dangerous political sentiments- tended to stick. Here we can see the dissension between key actors and later on with academics. Another main approach and criticism of the term ideology was the one provided by Marx. Indeed, it was a critique of De Tracy’s theory in the aspect of its social status and its concept. Thus, he first reproached the fact that De Tracy was a ‘minor vulgar bourgeois liberal political economist’ which was a ‘crime’ to him. It is interesting to see that at this time there is a shift in the understanding of the meaning of ideology. Hence, as Marx puts it in his book entitled The German Ideology (1845) it is understood as a pejorative ‘label’ to those who ‘interpret’ the world philosophically but do not appear to be able to change it. However, it is not legitimate in the aspect that he is in a certain aspect an ideologue because he still believes in the construction of a rational society and the improvement of humanity in it. Therefore he created his ideology with his perception of the perfect society. So, we can conclude that ideologies are theories that offer an account of an existing order and give a specific worldview on the matter and what they consider the Good Society and its supposed future.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
The term ideology nowadays is mostly used in the political sphere and begets controversy. It was first considered as the science of ideas by De Tracy but nowadays it would be more correct to describe it as a developed social philosophy or worldview. As we learned from history, this has been used badly with the adoption of political ideologies as a necessary part of totalitarian regimes in the interwar period. For instance, in fascist Italy under Mussolini (1918-1945), where state thinking was an instrument of social control and a political weapon. This was especially denounced by (Karl Popper, Hannah Arendt, and J.L. Talmon) This emphasis worked so well that those who sacrificed their lives sometimes conspired as martyrs for those ideologies. This was the case for Gramsci who was kept as a prisoner in Mussolini’s prisons and wrote his famous Prison Diaries. In addition, we can distinguish classical ideological traditions such as liberalism, conservatism, and socialism that were developed in reaction to the industrial society.
An aspect to consider is the idea that ideologies tend to be constructed on a contradiction between generally two rival economic philosophies like the case of capitalism vs socialism. So it has evolved in contradiction to something to exists in some cases. Then we can see that ideologies are also linked to economics and encompass now a major place in many theories such as Marxism with the influence of the infrastructure on the superstructure. In nowadays Western societies we can distinguish that contemporary politics are a mix of old and new ideologies as is the case of feminism which is split into several subcategories such as socialist feminism liberal feminism or even Marxist feminism. Therefore, ideologies can be considered as constant change concepts that adapt themselves. We could also talk about competing epistemologies within the battle of ideologies. During the post-war periods, there were intense ideational battles between political ideologies and certainly the one between capitalism and communism. These conflicts revolved around civilization and its annihilators. They were all trying to promote a specific paradigm and idea of universal truth and a perfect society. For instance, the Western world was following an ideology promoting ‘education, inspiration, direction and conversion’ as missions, very American ideologies. While on the other hand, Eastern Europe was more interested in ‘the conversion of ideas into social levers’ (Bell). It appears that in the Anglo-American world, ‘ideology is all too often an alien implant, something concocted by spinners of dreams, otherworldly intellectuals, or machinators with totalitarian designs’ (Michael Freeden). On the other hand in Europe ideology is still considered a grand theory due to the events of the 20th century such as when the fascists were trying to face communists to impose their ideology on the world. It is nonetheless difficult to draw the line between political doctrines and political ideologies. Politicians need political ideologies and theories to express themselves and denounce systemic abuse and obfuscation through the force of superimposed ideas, and some of their 'actually is', and 'ideology' power. This is a link to Antonio Gramsci who explained that capitalism was not only achieved by coercion but also by the hegemony of ideas. It was widely spread and there was the domination of language, morality, culture, and common sense, with for instance the Americanization.
But the term ideology has come to a turning point with Charles Taylor talking about the 'politics of recognition’ becoming a significant point in the contemporary world. Ideologies now serve as a way to ask for recognition of identity essentially. Since the mid-twentieth there have been great debates on whether we could consider that ideologies came to a point of no return, thus, the subject of ‘the end of ideology’ poured a lot of ink into the academic field. This was a result of the collapse of most of the totalitarian regimes in Europe such as fascism and later on communism. Daniel Bell wrote in The End of Ideology that political ideologies were no longer relevant due to Western parties were only interested in power without proposing a political ideology but only promising higher levels of economic growth and material affluence. However, he was the leader and revived the movement of ‘end of history' theorists notably Fukuyama who assumed that only one ideology was left: liberal democracy because it had won over the other ideologies. There are notable problems with this theory as a whole. Indeed, it was supposed to be a temporary base in reaction to the last world wars and industrialization. Therefore we could ask ourselves if it is still relevant nowadays. In one sense, this theory of the ‘end of ideology’ was a reaction and reflection of the development of Western countries in the post-war period and it coincided with sociology at this time. Indeed, American sociology ‘offered the world the prospect of freedom from ideology, for it offered a “science” of society, in place of superstition’ (see Goldie in Ball et al. eds 1989, 268). But we can also argue that it can be considered a rite of passage to help the improvement of the concept of ideology. As Alasdair MacIntyre commented, the ‘end of ideology’ theorists ‘failed to entertain one crucial alternative possibility: namely, that the end-of-ideology, far from marking the end-of-ideology, was itself a key expression of the ideology of the time and place where it arose’ (MacIntyre 1971, 5).
In sum, this essay provides a general overview of what the term ideology could imply. Firstly, we tried to explain the development of the notion of ideology and the different perceptions of various political theorists. The discussion moved on to the meaning of an ‘ideology’ nowadays and the complications it still encounters in society. Finally, we assessed the approach of ‘the end of ideology’ theory. However, this question is mainly focusing on the term ideology and assumes theoretically that it is still an object of dissension. I would nevertheless argue that ideology is constantly changing and reinventing itself as we saw it with the new theories coming to light with for instance green politics. But are these real ideologies or political theories?
Stuck on your essay?
