"Ideology" In The Marxist Perspective?

[Prinskaj]

I have recently been listening a lot to lectures by Slavoj Zizek, but I am not quite certain what he means when using the term "ideology".
He said ones that he used the Marxist definition, or something along those lines, if I recall correctly.
Could someone explain what the term implies?

[Hiero]

I have recently been listening a lot to lectures by Slavoj Zizek, but I am not quite certain what he means when using the term "ideology".
He said ones that he used the Marxist definition, or something along those lines, if I recall correctly.
Could someone explain what the term implies?

Here is his edited book with a collection of essays on Ideology http://www.amazon.com/Mapping-Ideology-Slavoj-Zizek/dp/1859840558

Zizek changes the definition of ideology depending on what he is use it for. It is sort of hard to distinguish what a Marxist definition of ideology is as there is many sources that Zizek would use, Marx, Lukacs, Althusser, Benjamin or it could be Bourdieun critique where ideology is reflexive or a Lacan fantasy. If you could grab a quote it would be great, because then we could talk about in what instance does Zizek use ideology.

[Sten]

In Marx the term "ideology" carries a negative connotation, meaning any doctrine that offers a false and deformed perspective of reality and separates theory from the praxis. Instead of formulating a theory from the observation of reality, ideologues formulate a theory according to their interests (specifically class interests) and then try to adapt reality to their worldview.

It is related to concept of logical mysticism, that is the reversal of the relations between subject and object, and Abstract and Concrete.

[ArrowLance]

Ideology can be used a few different ways. Some people use it negatively to describe idea systems they just plain don't like. Very popular with us Marxists really, using words like that such as reactionary, fascist, bourgeois, and counter-revolutionary.

[hatzel]

I'm gonna have to go ahead and ask you to read this (http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/derrida2.htm)...

[Valdyr]

There are several different understandings of "ideology" used in Marxist writings, which can be a little confusing. These can be roughly sorted into two categories:

-Negative and specific
-Neutral and general

The former understanding was more often that which Marx himself employed. Ideology here is a definitely negative, critical term. It refers to ideas, modes of thinking, etc. which serve to reinforce existing power structures by concealing social contradictions with a sort of "inverted" consciousness. Let's take the ideology of the "free market" for example. Capitalist apologists wax lyrical about the virtues of free exchange. But the fleeting exchange of goods is only the shallow surface of a society's economic life, for underlying all of that is production. The ideology of "free exchange" sweeps production under the rug, because that is where the social contradictions (the exploitation, the destruction, etc.) occur, and it does so partly by "inverting" it. This is a very specific phenomenon - under this understanding, not even all ideas Marx doesn't like are ideologies.

The second understanding is that employed by most of the major 20th century revolutionaries, which is to refer to the "cultural logic" of any group. Hence, Marxism is the ideology of the working class. "Ideology" here is roughly, though not exactly, synonymous with outlook or even worldview. It is thus a neutral term, there is nothing inherently condemnatory in it. Some theorists elaborated on this broader version of the concept. Antonio Gramsci, for example, discusses at length his idea of how the big capitalist powers maintain hegemony primarily through their ideology rather than direct state violence. Still, this is a more general understanding of the term than that Marx usually employs.

Now, this isn't to say the latter conception isn't valid or something. There's a tendency among a lot of academic "Marxists" to basically treat Marx's works as a bible, saying "well MARX himself didn't say that!" Most of those major Marxists who employed the second version, like Lenin, just didn't have access to many of Marx's writings which focused on ideology, which were only (finally) published later. It's just important to understand both so you can navigate.

Hope that helped. :)

[Rafiq]

They do, but they do not know.

Ideology is the unconcious. It is the pressuposion that the belief relies

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[jookyle]

Marxism isn't really an ideology as much as it's the process.

[ckaihatsu]

(This thread seen by myself as a blatant opportunity for gratuitous diagram-posting.)


= )


[3] Ideologies & Operations -- Fundamentals

http://postimage.org/image/34modgv1g/

[Rafiq]

Marxism isn't really an ideology as much as it's the process.

It's none of those things. Communism is a process.

Marxism is a science, a mode of analysation.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[SHORAS]

Ideology is when you think you are a Marxist and have it all cracked.

[Prinskaj]

I was not trying to suggest that Marxism is an ideology, and if it seemed that way, then I am sorry for the confusion.


If you could grab a quote it would be great, because then we could talk about in what instance does Zizek use ideology.
LKBOL6xu1Sk
At 49:29