Chapter 6: Ideology

Chapter 6: Ideology

What is an ideology?

An ideology is a belief and a process. It is a belief about government – what government does, its functions, and its role. An ideology is a process because it is about identity politics. It is about the progression to identify with a particular way of thinking about a systematic political belief. Ideology contains a vision about one’s political world that includes political, economic, and social variables.

Political ideologies are important because they expose differences between individuals and among societies. Ideas, values, norms, and ideals offer alternative views that are difficult to overcome. These ideological differences are reflected in issues like abortion, guns, climate, environment, concepts of freedom, social welfare, education, etc. Political ideology is easier to identify when associated with tangible issues. In general, ideologies are not only shaped by how people think but how they act and perceive issues during their process of socialization.

The terms left and right are used in placing ideologies in a spectrum. The French Ancien Régime had a rigid social structure called the Three Estates, representing the clergy, the aristocracy, and the commoners. After the 1798 revolution, the legislative body, named the National Assembly, was divided between the commoners, or the people, sitting to the left, and sitting to the right were the aristocrats along with clergy. The left-wing represented progress, republicanism, the “sans culottes” (or the poor peasants), civil rights, and civil liberties. The right-wing ideology represented the aristocracy, the clergy, status quo, tradition, protection of private property, and royalty.

Ideologies have contributed to uprisings and other crises, such as the revolutions of the 18^th and 19^th centuries. In a way “the main role of ideologies in revolutions is to bring together diverse grievances and interests under a simple and appealing set of symbols of opposition.”¹ For instance, the twentieth century revolution in China, resulted in the end product known to as Maoism. Goldstone correctly states that “ideologies are not merely the sources of revolutions; ideologies are the products of revolutions as well.”² Look no further than the establishment of the USSR (1922) as an example of Leninist thought post Bolshevik revolution (1917).

Watch this Khan Academy Video on Ideology in the U.S.

Antonie Louis Claude Destutt de Tracy (1754-1836) provides for a good historical overview of what an ideology is, in part because, of his experience during the Reign of Terror of the French Revolution. Tracy worked to create a paradigm where ideology was a science of ideas along with its genealogy. However, today ideology “is generally taken to mean not a science of ideas, but the ideas themselves […] Thus an ideology exists to confirm a certain role in relation to social, economic, and political and legal institutions.”³ From Tracy to today, the concept of ideology has evolved into political identity and with it a variety of ideologies from right wing to left wing.. It is important to identify major ideologies that influenced politics in the 20^th century and continue to impact lives today. Some of the ideologies contained in the chapter range from Nazism to ecology. A useful way to conceptualize the movement from ideologies of the right to those of the left is to focus on equality. Ideologies of the right are associated with inequality while those of the left place a much greater emphasis on equality. The consideration of specific ideologies begins with those on the right – fascism and conservatism.

Fascism

Fascism glorifies elitism, hierarchy, and violence. In general, the authoritarian leader is influential, charismatic, and promotes obedience to their ruling. Fascism is a political ideology that promotes both fear and dogma of its followers. Fascism dismisses individualism, because individuals are needed to build and to obey the state organically, i.e., as part of a larger community that must not challenge the leader’s actions. The state maintains a façade of popularity by delivering limited but promised goods and services to the masses. Fascism is expansionist. Territory gain is important to show power. Fascism builds a sense of hyper nationalism. Mussolini’s Italy and Franco’s Spain are examples of fascist states during the 20^th century. For example, in Italy the laws of 1938 like Leggi Razziali or Regio Decreto 17 excluded Jews from public office and higher education.⁴ Statements by Mussolini like “Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, and none against the State” (1925)⁵ exemplify the central role of governing authorities.

Fascism and Nazism

Fascism, a reactionary right-wing ideology, is a product of a reaction against early 20^th century liberalism and socialism. The key elements of fascism are:

1—Humans are irrational. Fascism manipulates people through each other’s perception. The assumption is that individuals lack rationality and logic.

2—Differences and conflict coexist for the benefit of a selected few or an elite.

3—Hierarchy of culture is inevitable. Hierarchy of individuals is necessary for the social and political order to persist.

4—Nationalism is used to manipulate the masses as propaganda. Elites manipulate the masses into obedience by using nationalistic symbolism, culture, and folk stories. Much like the Volk peoples of Germany were used by Nazis.

5—The elite is like the “Übermensch” or the Nietzschean Overman. Elites’ rule requires conformity.

Some of the actions associated with fascism are war and conquest, masculinity, uniformity in actions and thought. An important assumption about fascism is that mass herds or people are not capable of leadership, because of mass emotional displays, and therefore, it is necessary to have a dictator for a leader. The dictator rules because the leader has rational leadership skills. In Italy, Mussolini was the law. He created laws that were designed to embellish and maintain his power. In Germany, Hitler demonstrated a more sadistic approach to governance. Not only did he govern with fear, but he also governed sadistically with racial laws that led to the elimination of millions of individuals.

Nazism transforms fascism by introducing a hierarchy of race into social and political life. Based on Volk peoples, a new ideology emerged establishing race at its center. The Aryan race was put on a pedestal as a race with superior culture, blaming the Jewish population for the economic problems in Germany as well as the outcomes of World War I. The German state needed to maintain its purity, and as such, racial purity was legislated with laws like:⁶

1—Reich Citizenship Law (1935)

2—Law for the Protection of German Blood and Honor (1935)

3—Concentration camps (1933-1945

Race played a gruesome role. Concentration camps were occupied by social and racially inferior individuals like but not limited to Jews, Roma, gays, Catholics, etc. These social and racial categories were established by the Nazi German state. Nazism included the Final Solution during the Holocaust, extermination, and labor camps. Fascist states commit resources to oppress views that may pose opposition to the state, while elevating elites who persecute and eliminate individuals who they consider inferior.

Social hierarchy and the misguided use of social Darwinism produced eugenics programs in Germany and in the U.S. Forced sterilizations, medical experimentation, and killings were all sanctioned by the state both in Germany and in the U.S. While these policies are no longer practiced as in the first half of the 20^th century, neofascism and white supremacy have filled that vacuum today.

Neofascism and White Supremacy take shape in social groups, and in political parties. In France The National Front, in the United Kingdom the Independence Party UKIP, in Italy the National Alliance as well as the Pim Fortyn’s List in the Netherlands are examples of extreme right-wing political parties that share neofascist and white supremacy ideas. Some of the issues that extreme right-wing groups and political parties share are the following: poorly educated white population, nationalistic tendencies, anti-immigrant, anti-refugees, economic grievances, anti-Islamic, racial and ethnic discrimination, anti-Semitic grievances, anti-Roma discrimination, and anti-African discrimination. In general, racist and xenophobic policies are the goal.

The table contains right-wing political parties and elections results in Europe.⁷

Conservatism

Conservatism argues that social hierarchy is necessary, because some individuals have the temperament for governance, while others have the temperament to be governed. For conservatives, progress is not desirable, instead the status quo and tradition should be maintained. For conservatives, protection of private property works as a stabilizing social and political force. Issues that are dear to conservative thought are religious protections (in the U.S the religious right), family traditions and values, strong and active military, hard work (pulling oneself-up by the bootstraps), social hierarchy, and commitment to God and country (a strong sense of patriotism). Traditional conservatism consists of classical ideas like small government, and laissez faire capitalism. Under conservatism, human nature offers an interesting variable for analysis. Rationality is limited among the masses. Irrational behavior is common among most individuals because their actions are linked to emotions. Because emotions drive individuals, it produces unpredictable behavior. Inequality is believed to be natural and necessary, in part because individuals have different capabilities, talents, and abilities. In conservatism, some individuals rule while others follow and obey. Law does not produce equality, because not all individuals are equal. Rights should not be equally dispersed because individuals are not equal. Edmund Burke argues for order, tradition, and control. Wisdom comes from the experience and the knowledge of the elite few. Reason is weak; however, tradition and morals are socially necessary and constant values to be protected. For conservative theory, morality is not a buffet to be picked through, it is a full package. Institutions like family and religion are tied to freedom, which in turn is tied to one’s public duty.

Issues that concern modern conservatives are self-reliance, trade (protectionist policies), individualism, marriage protections, gun protections, low taxes, and the promotion of offensive military. Some aspects of social Darwinism have been adopted by conservatives such as the survival of the fittest and competition. For modern conservatives, history is important, with myth like qualities. States are at the center of international negotiations. Domestically, states preserve political and civil institutions. In the United States, neoconservatism emerged during the George W. Bush years in the presidency, and later in the form of the Tea Party (2010) as a response to the election of President Barak Obama.

Liberalism

On the spectrum of ideologies, liberalism occupies the center. Two kinds of liberalism will be discussed here – classical and modern. Classical liberalism reflects on limited government, the authority of the state over its subjects. Human nature is an important component of classical liberalism, which suggests that natural freedom must be protected along with natural equality and natural reason. John Locke, a proponent of natural rights, argued that human nature is inherently good. Locke emphasized freedom and reason. Locke’s ideas about the laws of nature, provide for basic rules of human interaction. There is a difference between rationality and common sense in Lockean theory. Common sense allows for living, while rationality allows for an individual to strategize how to form and to participate in governance. Providing consent to create a government with limited power is important to protect life, liberty, and property. Obedience to such a government comes as a trade-off. Government for order, security, protection, and individuals maintain their natural rights.

For classical liberalism, individuals are rational who make their own choices. Government works with the consent of the governed. Power derives from the people. Progress is essential and it is a natural progression of human development. Liberalism and capitalism are an important portion of economic relations in a political community. Adam Smith argues that one of the duties of government, or the sovereign, is of “erecting and maintain certain publick works and certain publick institutions.”⁸ Smith also proposed that taxes should support public goods like roads and education. In this community, individuals are rational operators with self-interests that need to be satisfied. Under classical liberalism theory, natural equality is available to everyone. However, this is different from economic equality, which capitalism does not foster. Under classical liberalism, equal opportunity is different from equal outcome. While equal opportunity is a pillar of classical liberalism, equal outcome is not.

Modern liberalism wants more government action in the form of laws and regulations that favor state intervention. With modern liberalism, there is an extension of freedoms to minorities and arguments for a social distribution of power. Some of the pragmatic aspects of modern liberalism supports public goods and services to be provided and distributed by the government. Some of issues that are key to modern liberalism are access and distribution of public health and education, pro-choice policies, gun control, defensive military, safety in the workplace and laborers’ protection. Today modern liberalism includes environmental and climate issues. Justice and fairness are expanded to groups that have historically been on the margins of political, economic, and social life. Globally, indigenous peoples’ rights have gained traction. Modern liberalism continues the path of classical liberalism but expands on it by including marginalized voices and expanding the expectations of what the government is and what it is to do. This is important in order for government to continue to be relevant and useful to all peoples. Expansion of individual rights and protections is essential to modern liberalism.

Libertarianism

The great confusion of what libertarianism is. “Libertarian theory is closely relation to (indeed, at times practically indistinguishable from) the classical liberal tradition.”¹⁰ The genealogy of libertarianism starts with John Locke and classical liberalism. Furthermore, utilitarianism is also part of this theoretical tradition. Jan Narverson tackles the simple and yet utilitarian definition of libertarianism. Currently, libertarianism is part of a “moral and political philosophy [… it] is a doctrine that the only relevant consideration in political matters is individual liberty […] the person’s ‘rightful liberty,’ such that one may be forced to do or not do would violate, or at least infringe, the rightful liberty of some other person(s).”¹¹ The nature of libertarianism is often misused and misunderstood. The goal for this section of the chapter is to bring attention of an ideology and theory that offers insight to both liberal and conservative traditions. As Narveson suggests “Libertarianism is one kind of liberalism.” As such students of ideology need to consider libertarianism not as “my ideology” but a bridge to further understand the historical evolution of ideology as well as the connection between ideology and public policy. Conservatives who align with libertarians are in fact in a poor marriage alliance because conservatives insist “that the individual must sacrifice his or her own interests to the august purpose […] adding that policy is to be guided by his ‘real’ or ‘true’ interests, rather than by the shallow conception of those interests held by the individual concerned.”¹² The hesitation is obvious. Libertarianism has its genealogy in liberalism and allies with liberalism, and it fails in a conservative marriage. Studying libertarianism must be in its own terms. Libertarianism is fascinated by the concept of liberty. For students of libertarianism, it is important to study John Stuart Mil’sl On Liberty. Libertarian ideology holds individual freedom as paramount. Individuals are sovereign. Libertarians are skeptics of state control and legitimacy. Political authority poses a challenge to individual liberty and to private property. Government should prevent individuals from violating the rights and liberties of other individuals. Libertarians support little government action in social and economic affairs. “Libertarians endorse strong rights to individual liberty and private property; defend civil liberties like equal rights for homosexuals; endorse drug decriminalization, open borders, and oppose most military interventions.”¹³ While the discussion and the learning on ideologies is not over. Libertarian ideology has become popular in the United States.

Having looked briefly at ideologies of the right and the center, the discussion turns now to ideologies of the left. The two dominant ideologies of the left are socialism and communism.

Socialism

Utopian socialism argued for collaborative societies, in which, individuals worked for social change. These are peaceful social changes where the means of production are held in common. Workers are part of social network like Louis Blanc suggested in “social workshops.” The Oneida Community in the United States was an example of utopian socialism. This brand of socialism thrived in Europe as well with communities guided by Saint Simon and Charles Fourier. In general, there is an element of honor, a set of moral codes, and even, religion in these communities.

Socialist theory argues that human nature is caring and cooperative. Individuals have potential.¹⁴ Socialism fosters cooperation. Under socialism individuals have shared wealth production, shared labor responsibility, and shared economic output. The democratic processes are introduced to the state’s economic development, and these are also part of the community’s wellbeing. In socialism, it is not about one individual, but rather, it is about the organic whole. All contribute and participate for the social, economic, cultural, and political wellbeing of the community. In socialist theory, economic production is about the ownership of the means of production. There is a shared aspect of the means of production among the state, private individuals, and workers. Communism centers its argument based on the tension over the means of production, the proletariat versus the bourgeoisie conflicting relationship over the ownership of the means of production.

Communism

The idea that societies evolve in needs, such as economic development, is nothing new. Briefly, economic stages are as follows: agrarian, feudal, artisan, industrial, and service-based economy. These economic stages have an historical process. This historical process produced a capitalist society and, theoretically, it should lead to a communist society. Production relations gain new names – the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, terms popularized by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. The proletariat is selling its labor for wages. The bourgeoisie owns the means of production, purchases labor, and provides for lower wages. Class is the operational variable that is tied to class functionality. Labor is the surplus value added to a product or service. In a capitalist society, the bourgeoisie pays the workers’ labor. It is in their interest to pay less than the labor is actually worth. This process is called “surplus value.” Because the worker needs payment to avoid absolute poverty, the worker continues to work in this condition. The double edge sword is that workers traded labor for wages.

Capitalism is a social system because of its social impact. This social impact can be called alienation. This means the worker is separated from the self and from what he/she is producing by forcefully producing without creating. Marx explains this in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844. For Marx, alienation of labor “is external to the worker, i.e., it does not belong to his essential being […] His labour is therefore not voluntary, but coerced; it is forced labour.”¹⁵ Much like Marx, Lenin also promoted a revolution. Lenin’s vision was authoritarian, hierarchical, and based on a political party. The Vanguard party would lead a modest trade union. Lenin wrote on imperialism and inspired the top- down Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 in Russia. The version of socialism fostered by Lenin promoted centralized government that manages property, resources, and their distribution. Also, a decentralized local government with other groups, like farmers, that have a process of division of labor and allocation of public property. Josef Stalin manipulated socialist ideology to implement a reign of terror. Propaganda promoted by the state interfered in education, the arts, and science, among other areas of public life. Stalin created policies that created long term problems in agricultural output. Yet Stalin’s programs for fast industrialization and militarization worked for decades. Stalin created a totalitarian communist state that did not resemble the theories of communism from the 18^th and 19^th centuries.

The post Stalin period was dominated by two individuals, Nikita Khrushchev (1954-1964) and Leonid Brezhnev (1964-1982). After a brief power struggle, Khrushchev emerged as leader of the Soviet Union and began a policy of destalinization. He delivered a secret speech in 1956 in which the crimes of Stalin were denounced. He attempted numerous reforms of the Stalinist system, but was removed from power in 1964 due primarily to the instability associated with his reforms.

Brezhnev’s rule was characterized by two major themes – stability of cadres and stagnation. Stability of cadres was intended to communicate that the era of destabilizing reforms was over. This policy was extended to other communist-dominated countries. For instance, when the Czechoslovakian communists experimented with reforms in 1968, the Soviet Union invaded the country removed the reformers and installed a neo-Stalinist regime. Stalin’s successful rebuilding of the Soviet Union’s economy following the devastation of WWII enabled the country to enjoy GDP growth into the 1970s. By the end of the 1970s, however, economic growth had stalled. Badly needed economic reforms were not being enacted. The lack of economic improvements and developments led Mikhail Gorbachev (1985-1991) to advocate for perestroika (reconstructing), a new and reformed command economy in 1985 that promoted market socialism. Gorbachev’s reforms failed in the face of significant political opposition. So-called hardliners opposed reforms which took power from the Communist Party. Others (Boris Yeltsin, for instance) believed Gorbachev’s reforms were proceeding too slowly and did not go far enough to address the nation’s economic woes. The failure of these reforms and the accompanying political instability contributed to the collapse of the Soviet system in 1991.

In 1947, Mao Zedong ended a decaying imperial China with a bottom-up revolution of the common people. This movement allowed for a sense of liberation, people organized, and a revolutionary promoted ideology. Maoism was associated with peasant socialism, guerilla warfare, mass action, and rectification. An example of the masses being call to action was the The Great Leap Forward (1958-1962) was an attempt to modernize China economically put forth by Mao Zedong; it included the creation of large collective farms. These programs moved China from an agrarian society into a communist society based on Mao’s vision. Rectification, an attempt to eliminate all vestiges of bourgeoise influence in China, was most dramatically undertaken in The Great Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) which devolved into a reign of terror in China when intellectuals were purged along with experts in various fields. The temporary result was an increase in wages for workers in agriculture, namely in the rice paddies. The instability of the GPCR delayed further modernization progress.

The post-Mao era was initially dominated by a rejection of commitment to ideology in favor of “pragmatism.” Political power was decentralized among several leaders (fragmented authoritarianism) so that no one would be as powerful as Mao had been. Under the leadership of Deng Xiao Peng (1978-1992) liberalization reforms were introduced into the Chinese economy resulting in astonishing economic growth. Economic reforms, yes, but political reforms on the order of what was happening in the Soviet Union, no. A student-led democracy movement centered in Tiananmen Square in Beijing was crushed by the Chinese military on July 4, 1989. While China maintains a communistic political system, economically China is a controlled capitalist economy under the leadership of Xi Jinping, leader of the Chinese Communist Party since 2012 and President of China since 2013. Perhaps the distinguishing feature of Xi’s leadership has been the recentralization of power in his hands.

Green Politics and Ecology

This last section of the chapter is problematic for the left-right spectrum (or more accurately right-left) introduced at the beginning of the chapter. A number of ideologies could be included here – feminism, communitarianism, and green politics. They tend to be found on the left or migrate to the left,(consider the current government in Germany which includes socialists and greens). but they are so narrowly focused. They lack the all-encompassing nature of the ideologies studied thus far. The example of that group of ideologies to be considered here is green politics

Green politics, environmental politics, ecology, naturalism, to name only a few, have in common the idea that global green issues are part of politics and of individuals’ belief systems. While these terms are not the same and mean different aspects of political and ideological life, there is one thing they have in common: an international movement that shares a concern about the survival of the planet. Human actions are putting the planet in jeopardy. The genealogy of this ideology starts at least with Aristotle in ancient times. The concept of stewardship is very important in green analysis. In general, stewardship argues that humans have a right to access earth’s resources for their needs and survival. However, this does not mean that humans have a right to ownership and to the exploitation of the environment and ecological systems. The assumption that one can own land, for example, is a misuse of natural resources. Stewardship is the counter argument to owning land. Land ownership promotes a sense of entitlement that produces self-centered anthropogenic actions that put the earth in peril. Ownership is problematic for ecological integrity. Ecosystems do not recognize geopolitical borders or fences. Territories designated by states, by corporations, by individuals, fail to save ecological arrangements of mother nature. Natural resources must be protected by regulations, treaties, laws, and by one’s willingness to save mother earth for future generations. Humans and their activity must think of nature not in terms of conquering, of domesticating, or of dominating it, but in terms of preservation or keeping nature alive. Food production and distribution, deforestation, desertification, greenhouse gases, pesticides and herbicides, coral bleaching, and plastic use, are all issues that contribute to global environmental disasters.

Environmental causes worth fighting for:

• Protect black footed ferret
• Protect breeding grounds for turtles
• Stop shark fin practices
• Protect whales
• Protect endangered species like gorillas, elephants, and rhinoceros
• Keep fertile land in the hands of farmers (fight against land grabs, or big agribusiness)
• Support artisan mining along with ecologically safe mining activities
• Stop eating meat … go vegan!
• Promote a new generation of geothermal energy

Green politics is embedded in European politics, and it goes to the ballot in the form of political parties—green political parties. Mega international conferences like Stockholm 1972, Rio Earth Summit 1992, Rio + 20 2012 make for good conversation and affirmation of the obvious, but generally, lack in real action and outcomes. The lack of global leadership is a hinderance to prioritizing green policies. This lack of leadership opens a space for domestic policies to be both relevant and essential for a functional environmental public policy agenda.

Some ideas or problems to solve:

• Desertification
• Meltdown of glaciers
• Deforestation
• Greenhouse gases
• Food production and distribution
• Garbage
• Coral bleaching
• Overfishing
• Methane