I’ve read a number of assignments and papers from students in all three of my courses who insist on using the term “ideology” or “ideological” or “ideologies.” This is rather puzzling. While I discussed the Marxist concept of the social formation (in rather simple terms of “the mode of production + the ideological superstructures”) in two of the classes, I never discussed theories of ideology as such, be they theories of misrecognition, false consciousness, distorted knowledge, blatant lies, or the traditional political science definition as a set of roughly coherent ideas about society, economy and politics (i.e., “liberalism,” “socialism,” “conservatism,” “feminism” and “nationalism”). Yet, a significant proportion of students insist of using the word – where are they picking up the word from? who is telling them about ideology? what are they being told about ideology? Why do some of them insist on called the labour theory of value an “ideology”? Why do others insist on calling the bread riot an “ideology”? I’d like to think they are a bunch of junior Marxists, but, instead, I get the impression that they are only using the word ideology because they believe it is expected of them – that it sounds academic or that it will appeal to my sensibilities or somesuch. Which, of course, is weird: ideology is a word I rarely use!
About
This is the personal website of Craig McFarlane, a doctoral candidate in the Graduate Programme in Sociology at York University, Toronto and a lecturer in the Department of Law at Carleton University, Ottawa. I also contribute to The Inhumanities.
Theoria
Categories
- Animals (106)
- Barbarians (8)
- Being Critical (7)
- Boneheaded (10)
- CFPs, Conferences, Lectures and Journals (55)
- Commentary (16)
- Dissertation (37)
- Election (7)
- Foucault (16)
- John Locke (3)
- Lanark County (13)
- Mandeville (1)
- Monsters (4)
- Montesquieu (6)
- Music (17)
- Other (105)
- Pets (7)
- Pirates (5)
- Research Notes (91)
- Sociology (25)
- State, Sovereignty & Violence (72)
- Teaching (38)
- Thomas Hobbes (4)
Archives
- February 2012 (1)
- January 2012 (2)
- December 2011 (7)
- November 2011 (5)
- October 2011 (2)
- September 2011 (2)
- August 2011 (2)
- July 2011 (7)
- June 2011 (7)
- May 2011 (3)
- April 2011 (6)
- March 2011 (5)
- February 2011 (6)
- January 2011 (5)
- December 2010 (2)
- November 2010 (5)
- October 2010 (3)
- September 2010 (2)
- August 2010 (4)
- July 2010 (5)
- June 2010 (4)
- May 2010 (1)
- February 2010 (2)
- January 2010 (7)
- December 2009 (5)
- November 2009 (3)
- August 2009 (9)
- July 2009 (7)
- June 2009 (5)
- May 2009 (10)
- April 2009 (5)
- March 2009 (5)
- February 2009 (2)
- January 2009 (3)
- December 2008 (4)
- November 2008 (8)
- October 2008 (4)
- September 2008 (6)
- August 2008 (8)
- July 2008 (10)
- June 2008 (13)
- May 2008 (6)
- April 2008 (5)
- March 2008 (4)
- February 2008 (10)
- January 2008 (6)
- December 2007 (5)
- November 2007 (3)
- October 2007 (3)
- September 2007 (5)
- August 2007 (7)
- July 2007 (1)
- June 2007 (6)
- May 2007 (12)
- April 2007 (9)
- March 2007 (7)
- February 2007 (9)
- January 2007 (18)
- December 2006 (5)
- November 2006 (13)
- October 2006 (19)
- September 2006 (15)
- August 2006 (15)
- July 2006 (7)
- June 2006 (13)
- May 2006 (11)
- April 2006 (7)
- March 2006 (14)
- February 2006 (11)
- January 2006 (25)
- December 2005 (17)
- November 2005 (27)
- October 2005 (6)
- September 2005 (10)
- August 2005 (3)
RSS
3 Comments
The word “ideology” is definitely in the air, so to speak. In fact, I can imagine Wolf Blitzer pronouncing the word right now. My guess is that students are picking it up from the media outlets. If you take a quick look at a Google news search for “ideology” you’ll see tons of uses of the word in an empty, benign and (sadly) phony-Marxist sense that basically means something like “worldview”, “faith”, or “web-of-belief”. One of the most interesting is a recent comment by the Pope summarized in a headline in “The Australian” that reads, “Pope rejects ideology for its own sake”. The really weird thing is that there seems to be a common, sleepwalking distinction between “good” and “bad” ideology, and most often used to point out a flaw in an opponents position–almost as if the correct way to think about things is without ideas!
I agree that mass media outlets and figures can and do throw the word “ideology” around too casually. But it is a word that one does encounter in academia a fair bit too. You may not use it in your lectures, but I can attest to other teachers using it. Granted, I don’t think teachers who use it misuse it, per se, but I think that some of them do drop it without properly defining it. I had a prof in one of my graduate seminars last semester ask us to define “ideology” – to which he got just as many different answers as there were students, both master’s and phd candidates. The prof didn’t seem particular pleased with any of the definitions either, but he did show some satisfaction with the ones around Marxist political economy.
My feeling is that the average undergrad isn’t using for any particular or conscious reason, like impressing the prof or aligning with Marx, but because it is an elusive word hanging around on the fringes of their lexicon, waiting to be found and given a home.
Craig, You probably already know all of this.
Everything that everyone says, writes, and does is governed by all sorts of uninspected ideas or ideologies–no exceptions.
Even, or perhaps especially, language itself, which has and carries all kind of ideological assumptions re the structure and structuring of the world.
People in different language groups have a completely different sense of self and thus see and act in the world in different ways.
I have noticed that those on the “right” quite often accuse everyone on the left as being ideologically motivated and of wishing to engage in, and impose on everyone, various programs of ideologically motivated social engineering.
Never mind that capitalism via the advertising industry has been the largest and most “successful” example of mass social engineering ever conducted on this planet.
It now has a logic of its own.
Any and everything that may appear to be slightly different is instantaneously enfolded by the system and made into another consumer product.
The corollary of that is of course that those on the “right” are expressing some kind of eternal transcendental truth completely free of any kind of ideology—-the Pope for instance in his statement.
Never mind that Christianity is a one hundred percent man made set of HALF-BAKED ideas—an ideology. It should rightly be called Christian-ISM.
Post a Comment