‘Ideology’ is one of those words that can have an expansive or narrow definition and, as such, it is generally abused. I wish to write an article in which I define it more tightly for the purposes of serious political analysis. The loose, wide definition is something like ‘a set of beliefs about the world which determines a person’s behaviour’. This will not do because, first, people have many beliefs about the world upon which they do not act (stated vs. revealed preference) and, second, there are many actions and decisions people take on a daily basis that have no reference to their conscious belief system whatsoever. ‘Ideology’ is something more general, nebulous and all-encompassing
Althusser is a materialist, his anthropology, metaphysics & epistemology is all provably false, incoherent & contradictory. Such atheist copes for "why people do thing? wot meaning of life?" can construct synthetic frames which give some coherence to a set of past events, but ultimately always have their utility constrained by not being rooted in an accurate description of reality.
"Such a theory considers that there is no transcendent principle or external cause to the world, and that the process of life production is contained in life itself."
"Althusser's understanding of contradiction in terms of the dialectic attempts to rid Marxism of the influence and vestiges of Hegelian (idealist) dialectics, and is a component part of his general anti-humanist position. In his reading, the Marxist understanding of social totality is not to be confused with the Hegelian. Where Hegel sees the different features of each historical epoch – its art, politics, religion, etc. – as expressions of a single essence, Althusser believes each social formation to be "decentred", i.e., that it cannot be reduced or simplified to a unique central point."
"Because Althusser held that a person's desires, choices, intentions, preferences, judgements, and so forth are the effects of social practices, he believed it necessary to conceive of how society makes the individual in its own image."
Boy do I dislike the university academic's tone. Glad you don't still write this way. It comes across as an obsequious need to not step on toes, at least in plain language. A bit ironic, considering the topic.
Our ideology is whatever the Rothschilds and their Committee of 300 want it to be. They're the ones that took out the Tzar and organised the revolution, they arranged WWI and II, they're no doubt behind the scamdemic and Ukraine situation. They control the Fed and via Vanguard etc most of our food supply. They through their agents such as Rockefeller control the global medical/health industry. They through the Rockefeller foundation and their freinds at Tavistock control the social engineering of culture. The list goes on, the top of the pyramid decides what the ideology will be, just as a CEO decides the organisational structure and culture of their corporation. We're living in a Plato's Cave chained by socialengineering and propaganda watching the illusions they want played on the wall, the illusions that mpst of the masses mistake for reality.
"Althusser has suffered a decline in reputation... because he murdered his wife in 1980 and spent the last decade of his life in and out of a mental asylum."
Yep... that'll do it.
Also, who in his right mind would call AA a crypto-Marxist? He's very clearly a crypto-Maoist.
Brave New World might be better than 1984 as an example of elites immersed in their own ideology. The Inner Party seems more cynical and know they are peddling BS, while even the Alphas in BNW are test-tube babies just like everyone else.
If I'm getting this, and according to your criteria (1-4), Capitalism, Christianity and Environmentalism would all fit the definition of an ideology? Rather like stars, that are formed ,fade & die, some are fading (capitalism, Christianity) and some have just been formed (environmentalism - at least in its latest guise) yet all three are living ideologies, today.
Althusser is a materialist, his anthropology, metaphysics & epistemology is all provably false, incoherent & contradictory. Such atheist copes for "why people do thing? wot meaning of life?" can construct synthetic frames which give some coherence to a set of past events, but ultimately always have their utility constrained by not being rooted in an accurate description of reality.
"Such a theory considers that there is no transcendent principle or external cause to the world, and that the process of life production is contained in life itself."
"Althusser's understanding of contradiction in terms of the dialectic attempts to rid Marxism of the influence and vestiges of Hegelian (idealist) dialectics, and is a component part of his general anti-humanist position. In his reading, the Marxist understanding of social totality is not to be confused with the Hegelian. Where Hegel sees the different features of each historical epoch – its art, politics, religion, etc. – as expressions of a single essence, Althusser believes each social formation to be "decentred", i.e., that it cannot be reduced or simplified to a unique central point."
"Because Althusser held that a person's desires, choices, intentions, preferences, judgements, and so forth are the effects of social practices, he believed it necessary to conceive of how society makes the individual in its own image."
etcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetc
Refreshing ideas and takes! Your work will be considered part of the corpus for all future Caesars
Boy do I dislike the university academic's tone. Glad you don't still write this way. It comes across as an obsequious need to not step on toes, at least in plain language. A bit ironic, considering the topic.
Our ideology is whatever the Rothschilds and their Committee of 300 want it to be. They're the ones that took out the Tzar and organised the revolution, they arranged WWI and II, they're no doubt behind the scamdemic and Ukraine situation. They control the Fed and via Vanguard etc most of our food supply. They through their agents such as Rockefeller control the global medical/health industry. They through the Rockefeller foundation and their freinds at Tavistock control the social engineering of culture. The list goes on, the top of the pyramid decides what the ideology will be, just as a CEO decides the organisational structure and culture of their corporation. We're living in a Plato's Cave chained by socialengineering and propaganda watching the illusions they want played on the wall, the illusions that mpst of the masses mistake for reality.
"Althusser has suffered a decline in reputation... because he murdered his wife in 1980 and spent the last decade of his life in and out of a mental asylum."
Yep... that'll do it.
Also, who in his right mind would call AA a crypto-Marxist? He's very clearly a crypto-Maoist.
Brave New World might be better than 1984 as an example of elites immersed in their own ideology. The Inner Party seems more cynical and know they are peddling BS, while even the Alphas in BNW are test-tube babies just like everyone else.
If I'm getting this, and according to your criteria (1-4), Capitalism, Christianity and Environmentalism would all fit the definition of an ideology? Rather like stars, that are formed ,fade & die, some are fading (capitalism, Christianity) and some have just been formed (environmentalism - at least in its latest guise) yet all three are living ideologies, today.