[Marxism] Partisanship and Objectivity in Theoretical Work

["Charles Brown" <cbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Louis Kontos :
Charles,
A few thoughts on this post.

(1) bourgeois ideology doesn't appear to exist as a 'closed' system
in contemporary society, except perhaps among the political class and
some reactionary groups. the general public doesn't appear
ideological in the same sense; which is why answers to opinion
surveys are all over the map ideologically. in 1967, when ideological
lines were sharper, arguably, philip converse found that only 17 per
cent of the american public was 'ideologically consistent', meaning
that you could guess their responses to questions from their
responses to other questions.
bourgeois ideology does in fact seem to work partly at the level of
interpellation, as althusser argued, since people whose core identity
is created through official myths, narratives and ubiquitous
propaganda (wall to wall business-speak) respond to ideological
pronouncements as if they (pronouncements) embody the voice of
reason. i think gramsci was also right in his rendering of the
concept of bourgeois ideology normative -- i.e., equating it with
'common sense' rather than any specific set of political beliefs,
which means not only that the status quo is naturalized, that the
politics of ideas (political ideologies) are neutralized/obscured,
but also that there is something wrong or deviant about the person
who rejects bourgeois ideology, in that he appears to lack common
sense. marcuse was right too, in my view, to argue that the power of
bourgeois ideology in contemporary society lies in its apparent
realization/materialization (whereby rationalization in the weberian
sense supports rationalization in the freudian sense as a method of
reconciling contradictions in experience), and by closing spaces for
critical dialogue.

the problem, in that case, is not that people believe in such things
as 'the market', but that they have learned to use such concepts
axiomatically to offset critique/judgment and shut down debate.

^^^^^
CB: Louis, can we conclude that the masses in the U.S. do not have ideology
? "Ideology" is an obsolete term in understanding the consciousness of most
people in the U.S. ? Or on the other hand that Americanbourgeois ideology is
so firmly embedded in the masses consciousness and unconsciousness that,
with vigorous "defense mechanisms", that there is no direct assault on it by
communist ideas ? There is no potential or actual battle of ideas with
Americans. They operate on true belief, politics as religious dogma.
Americans have political religion, not political ideology.

It will take cunning to get them to immanently critique themselves, maybe ?

^^^^^^^


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism