Essay \"Marx\'s concept of ideology\" - grade 74 PDF

Preview

Summary

Marx's concept of ideology...

Description

University of Leeds

SCHOOL OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL POLICY How did Marx define the concept of ideology and how did later Marxists develop this concept? Consider the relevance of the concept of ideology for contemporary sociological analysis.

Ideology can be defined as a system of ideas and ideals that usually form the basis of a collective group of thought. Within sociology, the development of the Marxist concept of ideology allows us to analyse the contributions Marxism has made to general sociological theory, as well as allowing us to understand the relevance within contemporary society. Marx’s original concept of ideology was heavily influenced by the work of Hegel, critiquing idealism and materialism to then form his own thesis that ideology was in fact a working product of the current economic situation. It is also important to consider how later Marxists then developed the concept of ideology, each focussing on different aspects. Gramsci firstly focused on how ideology could be altered, forming his idea of hegemony and the creation of organic intellectuals who could change ideology from within the current oppressive system. In contrast, Lukács was concerned with exploring the Hegelian influence within Marx’s concept of ideology and the effect of economic motives. Finally, Althusser’s work on the transmission of ideology through state apparatuses focused on how ideology could impact the individual, and the process of how we begin to recognise ourselves as subjects. Each of these ideas will be explored in depth to show how they have contributed to the overall Marxist concept of ideology. The development of Marx’s concept of ideology is still relevant in contemporary society and can be linked to the agency/structure debate that dominates modern sociological thought. The rise of postmodernism presents obstacles for the Marxist view of ideology, yet parallels can be drawn with structuralism. Marx did not make ideology a main focus within his writings, but the work he did produce was influenced by Hegel’s work: Phenomenology of the Spirit. The concept of ideology for Hegel was formed by forces which were present in society, and ‘history was thus defined as enclosing an imminent meaning in that is embodied a ceaseless activity and drive towards unlimited, total consciousness.’ 1 Marx took the idea that ideology could be formed by the world around us and instead argued that it was specifically developed by one aspect of our surroundings: the economy. He argued against the idealist works of Hegel and instead proposed that ‘there must always be a material substratum to human consciousness.’ 2 Ideology therefore represented an indisputable link between consciousness and the current material 1 Swingewood, A, 1991, A Short History of Sociological Thought, 2nd edition, Basingstoke, Macmillan Education, p64 2 Dodd, N, 1965, Social Theory and Modernity, Cambridge, Polity Press, p14

and economic conditions of society. Ideology, for Marx, ‘is tied directly to economic and class interests and determines consciousness through the sensuous activity of the human subject.’3 This lead to the development of the concept of ‘historical materialism’; history and society have been shaped by the driving economic force of the time, but more importantly to the benefit of the ruling class. Ideas themselves are rooted in material context and do not exist independently of social formation. What interested Marx was how the ruling classes manipulated the concept of ideology and how it affected the working class. In The German Ideology Marx stated that ‘what men are, coincides with their production, both with what they produce and how they produce. The nature of individuals thus depends on the material conditions determining their production.’4 Here, Marx emphasises that the very character of the working class is defined by the economy. If the characteristics of Capitalism include high profit and undistributed wealth, the characteristics of the Proletariat will be a hard work ethic for very low wages. This raises an interesting question – if humanity creates its own social world through conforming to the economic conditions of the time, why has it created a society which is driven by inequality and hostility? Marx’s answer to this was false consciousness. The concept of ideology has ensured the longevity of economic systems, while the function of ideology has ensured the longevity through providing a smokescreen to hide the injustice that continues to be produced. It is crucial that labourers are ‘willing to accept their subordinate position within society.’ 5 Functionalist theorists would dispute this, since being a consensus theory, the belief is held that society works for the benefit of its members. Therefore, ideology is not something which maintains inequality; it maintains stability. Marx’s concept of ideology has not gone without further criticism. McLellan notes ‘in his youth, Marx detected an ambivalence in his master Hegel, and the same ambivalence was present – not surprisingly – in his disciple.’ 6 Although Marx clearly identifies that ideas themselves stem from a material context, he does little to suggest how these ideas could stem from other influences within society, and how this would even be possible. This draws similarities with Marx’s work in general. He did not provide an action plan for how to change society, but rather encouraged the Proletariat to do this for themselves. This air of vagueness provides context for the rest of Marx’s readings, therefore Marx’s concepts must be taken with caution when applying Marxist theory in contemporary society. Another key observation when examining Marx’s concept of ideology is the idea that ‘ideology thus binds people to the social structure in a similar manner to core values in Parson’s theory.’7 For Marx, the Proletariat are bound to the means of production through ideology which stems from the economy, providing a cycle of status quo. For Parsons, for consensus and stability is achieved through the maintenance of shared values through ideology promoting these values. Both theories explain the maintenance of society through ideology, even though the outcomes are conflicting. 3 Swingewood, A, 1991, A Short History of Sociological Thought, 2nd edition, Basingstoke, Macmillan Education, p79 4 Marx, K, 1970, The German Ideology with an introduction by C.J. Arthur, London, Lawrence and Wishart, p7 5 Layder, D, 2006, Understanding Social Theory, 2nd edition, London, Sage, p47 6 McLellan, D, 2006, Marxism After Marx, 4th edition, Basingstoke, Macmillan, p2 7 Layder, D, 2006, Understanding Social Theory, 2nd edition, London, Sage, p48

Marx’s concept of ideology has left a lot to be explored. One person to do so was Gramsci. He was mainly concerned with the ideological struggle in the process of a revolution. He stated ‘all men are intellectuals… but not all men have in society the function of intellectuals.’8 The functioning intellectuals are the people whom dominant ideology works in favour for, and therefore preserve hegemony – dominance of the ruling class over others. The way in which ideology would be used, Gramsci suggested, was for the Proletariat to fashion its own organic intellectuals who could ‘draw out and make coherent the latent inspirations and potentialities already inherent in working class activity.’9 The concept of ideology stemming from material conditions was something these individuals could recognise and then challenge. Instead of a full frontal traditional attack on the Bourgeoisie, a change in ideas from the working class could grow strong enough to change the economy by a war of manoeuvring. For Gramsci, the concept of ideology is a tool, which, if used properly, could become the prime factor in not only starting a revolution, but also making it successful. Nevertheless, Gramsci’s theory juxtaposes traditional Marxism on the grounds that ideology will inevitably be created by the Bourgeoisie, therefore it can never be used as a tool by the proletariat unless this is the aim of the ruling class. Lukács was another Marxist thinker writing after the First World War, which brought about a lot of instability for capitalism in many European countries. He was seen as ‘the first Marxist thinker seriously to evaluate the role of Hegel in the formation of Marx’s thought and recapture the Hegelian dimension in Marxism.’ 10 Lukács focused on consciousness because he believed the conditions of society after the Great War were ideal for a revolution. He argued that the Proletariat must be able to see that ideology had not stemmed from economic conditions, and that they must see the world as a complete separation from the forces that continue to hold society in place; ‘only when the consciousness of the proletariat is able to point out that the road along which the dialectics is objectively compelled… will the consciousness of the proletariat become the identical subject-object of history whose praxis will change reality.’11 Even though some contemporary Marxists argue that Lukács is too philosophical, the concept of ideology is crucial for the Proletariat to understand, since once they realise the true origins, they can break free of the ideology maintaining Capitalism. Arguably some of the most influential work of later Marxists developing the concept of ideology are the works of Althusser. His aim was to develop further areas of Marxism which Marx himself had only considered briefly in his works. He was writing in a time of ‘rapidly changing intellectual fashion of radical thought during the 1960s and 1970s.’12 Writing in Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses Althusser argues that ‘ideology represents the imaginary relationship of individuals to their real conditions of existence… ideology is an illusion.’ 13 The way in which we relate to our place within society is through interpellation. We subconsciously act in a way we 8 Gramsci, A, The Prison Notebooks edited and translated by Hoare, Q, 1992, 2nd edition, London, Lawrence & Wilshart, available at https://libcom.org/files/Gramsci%20-%20Selections%20from%20the%20Prison%20Notebooks.pdf 9 McLellan, D, 2006, Marxism After Marx, 4th edition, Basingstoke, Macmillan, p198 10 McLellan, D, 2006, Marxism After Marx, 4th edition, Basingstoke, Macmillan, p172 11 Lukács, G, History and Class Consciousness, 1971, London, p178 12 Craib, I, 1992, Modern Social Theory: from Parsons to Habermas, 2nd edition, London, Pearson, p149

have been conditioned to act and this is shown through how we relate to other individuals who have different places within society. For example, we may automatically show respect to a police officer, or a manager in a work environment. Althusser believed the transmission of this ideology was vital in determining the nature of society. Ideology is transmitted in two methods, through ideological state apparatuses and repressive state apparatuses. Ideological state apparatuses ‘represent themselves to the immediate observer in the form of distinct and specialised institutions’14 and include institutions such as the education system and family unit (two of which Althusser believed to be extremely influential). Repressive state apparatuses can be identified in the form of the armed forces or the police. Althusser stated these institutions were responsible for transmitting dominant ideology, although not each evenly distributing the same quantity, which worked to the benefit of the current economic system and therefore allowed capitalism to flourish. A key point here is that for Althusser, ‘the economic base of the ideological and institutional overlay.’15 This contrasts with traditional Marxist thought regarding ideology. Althusser argued ideology could not be identified as something of a completely separate entity, and although it influences economic conditions, it is also a product of economic conditions. He developed Marx’s conception of ideology in a ‘plainly positivist context’16 to also include ideology as something which can actually be reinforced by individuals within a society. Marx viewed ideology as stemming from the economic conditions of the time: Althusser viewed ideology as something which stemmed from economic conditions but was also reinforced subconsciously through apparatuses put in place to transmit it. Nevertheless, parallels can be drawn between Marx and Althusser’s ideas on the concept of ideology. Althusser can be viewed as a ‘representative of a more orthodox and traditional form of Marxism … giving us specific knowledge of the world that can be employed in developing a political strategy for bringing the working class to power.’17 Both theories of ideology view the concept as something that can be scientifically studied and acts in a way that can be measured and quantified. The Marxist concept of ideology is something which is still relevant in contemporary society, and it is crucial to remember ‘the contributions of Marxist theory to social science seem considerable, and not to be relinquished.’ 18 Through recent years sociologists have seemed engulfed in the agency/structure debate, and ideology has been analysed through how it is created; whether through individualistic action or seemingly passed down through structural forces. The impact of ideology has also been hotly debated; whether members of society are completely influenced by 13 Althusser, L, 1971, Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses in Lenin and Philosophy and other Essays, London, New Left Books, available from: http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/althusser/1970/ideology.htm, p25 14 Althusser, L, 1971, Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses in Lenin and Philosophy and other Essays, London, New Left Books, p16 15 Layder, D, 2006, Understanding Social Theory, 2nd edition, London, Sage, p48 16 Althusser, L, 1971, Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses in Lenin and Philosophy and other Essays, London, New Left Books, p23 17 Craib, I, 1992, Modern Social Theory: from Parsons to Habermas, 2nd edition, London, Pearson, p151 18 Craib, I, 1992, Modern Social Theory: from Parsons to Habermas, 2nd edition, London, Pearson, p149

institutions around them or whether they are free willed rational actors who create ideology of their own accord. Marxism seems to clash with postmodern theories, since ‘postmodernism is in strong opposition to what is called a “metanarrative” – any view which aims to give a unified, consistent and objective account … in one overarching framework.’ 19 Traditional Marxism views the concept of ideology as something created by economic conditions for the benefit of the ruling which is then distributed throughout society through false class consciousness. Subjectivist theories heavily reject this and argue individuals themselves create the concept of ideology through putting it into action by social interaction. This is not to be said the Marxist concept of ideology is not relevant in contemporary society. It is important to remember ‘Marx expressed ideas on different spheres of thought, some suited to the occasion and some of limited interest.’ 20 This applies to his concept of ideology. Although Marx did not focus his work on ideology, the concept of historical materialism and the emphasis on economic conditions affecting ideology is still relevant, since society today does seem largely driven by the economy and capitalism and consumerism continue to thrive, at least in Western societies. Marx’s concept of ideology is something that was heavily influenced by Hegel and turned idealism into materialism, emphasising the importance of the economy that shadows all of Marx’s work. Later Marxists took this concept and developed it further, with Gramsci looking at the use of ideology as a tool for revolution, Lukács analysing the Hegelian aspect of the concept in more detail and Althusser focusing on the transmission of ideology. The relevance of the Marxist concept of ideology in contemporary society seems diminished due to the rise of postmodernism, yet it is undeniable that economic conditions still have a huge impact on society, leaving the Marxist concept of ideology still credible and applicable to modern society.

19 McLellan, D, 2006, Marxism After Marx, 4th edition, Basingstoke, Macmillan, p406 20 Rodinson, M, 1968, Marxist Sociology and Marxist Ideology, Diogenes, Volume 16, Issue 64, Available from: http://0dio.sagepub.com.wam.leeds.ac.uk/content/16/64/57 p58...