PPE Notes Sociological Theory Notes
Notes on ideology, class, and methodology. Including summaries of Bourdieu, Durkheim, Weber, Zizek, Marx and Giddens....
The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Sociological Theory Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Nicholas Abercrombie, Stephen Hill and Bryan Turner - The Dominant Ideology Thesis
Introduction
The apparent success of capitalism in surviving crises, the absence of violent revolutionary struggle and the general coherence of industrial society is often explained by Marxists in terms of the dominant ideology thesis
this thesis claims that there is a dominant ideology and that it creates an acceptance of capitalism in the working classes
dominant ideology:
is generated by the dominant class’s control over the means of mental production
is a set of coherent beliefs
these beliefs are more powerful, dense and coherent than those of subordinate classes
this thesis is comparable to other functionalist theories of common culture in sociology, which claim that societies require a shared set of values and beliefs
A dominant ideology thesis has to answer four questions:
what is the dominant ideology?
what effect does it have on the dominant class?
what effect does it have on subordinate classes?
what is the apparatus that transmits the dominant ideology in society?
is the dominant ideology active - the product of one class doing something - indoctrination, for example - to another class?
or is it structured in terms of relations, and hence not ‘instrumentalist’?
The dominant ideology thesis is both theoretically and empirically unjustified:
we can explain coherence in society without reference to a dominant ideology (or even ideology at all)
we can find no evidence of an accepted belief set that could constitute an ideology
Theories of the Dominant Ideology
Marx’s account (in the German Ideology) states that the ruling class control the means of mental production
hence it is a class theoretical account
are they saying that the ideology created merely controls public life, or controls all life, so that a subversive ideology couldn’t exist?
their belief in class struggle seem to suggest that they do not endorse a fully fledged incorporation theory
Early Marxism was driven by a crude positivism, which sought to derive law-like propositions governing society through economic analysis
post-Bernstein Marxists
were academics, not activists
were interested in the method of Marxism, and objected to positivism, emphasising human agency
supposed that the secrets of capitalism didn’t just lie in the economy, but in superstructural questions of politics and ideology
remoteness from the working class struggle promoted an academic interest in philosophy and art and a pessimistic belief in the essential stability of capitalism
Gramsci
Gramsci was motivated by his opposition to economism
cultural differences between societies are not epiphenomena; they have political, social and economic effects
politics and ideology are autonomous practices
Introduced the concept of hegemony - a leadership that is ideological, political and repressive
there is a historical variation in in balance between coercion (repression) and consent (ideology) in hegemony
Russia rules mostly through coercion, the West mostly through consent
consent is not automatic, but rather must be manufactured, through the civil society rather than the state
civil society is private, ideological institutions such as the church, trade unions and schools
relationships of hegemony are educational relationships - the intellectual stratum educates
this stratum is not autonomous; each intellectual belongs to a social class
Because Gramsci sees civil society as dominant in the West, the cultural ascendancy of the ruling class must explain the stability of the capitalist order
this allows it to rule the working class by consent
For Gramsci, ideology is not all determining; the working class is not completely subordinated to the dominant ideology
he argues that the working class has a dual consciousness, in which one conflicts with the other, but no self-consciousness
the dominant ideology produces moral and political passivity in the working class
rectifying this is the job of the party
Habermas
Elevates the superstructure; relegates economism
in early capitalism, the economy has primacy
in late capitalism, politics and economics are literally inseparable
Habermas claims that there needs (functional) to be a process that legitimates social systems, that is not reducible exclusively to conscious beliefs (also material achievements etc)
traditional societies are legitimated by a central world view e.g. religion
early capitalism is legitimated by reciprocal exchanges in the market - fair and equal markets suggest just results
hence the legitimation of early capitalism comes upwards, from economic relations, and is not imposed by a cultural superstructure
late capitalism involves state intervention, and is legitimated differently
it requires a legitimation that facilitates manipulation of state intervention that ‘secure the private form of capital utilization and bind the masses’ loyalty to this form’
this is the depoliticisation of the masses, so that state activities do not seem to be political activities, bu rational, technical, almost scientific solutions
there are processes, or mechanisms of legitimation, such as parliamentary democracy
this ameliorates the worst effects of capitalism and preserves its essential form,...
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Sociological Theory Notes.
Notes on ideology, class, and methodology. Including summaries of Bourdieu, Durkheim, Weber, Zizek, Marx and Giddens....
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get Started