RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN MARXIST THEORIES OF IDEOLOGY

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN MARXIST THEORIES OF IDEOLOGY

Terry E Boswell

Edgar V Kiser

Kathryn A Baker

Discussion of Althusserrsquos essay ldquoIdeology and Ideological StateApparatusesrdquo (1971) has lled the introductory sections of recent Marxistworks on ideology Despite its provisional and underdeveloped charac-ter this essay has served as both a starting place from which to expandand as the position necessary to criticize in order to break new theo-retical ground Aronowitz recently claimed that Althusserrsquos theory ofideology ldquois the most advanced point historical materialism has beenable to arrive at in the search for a theory adequate to its object latecapitalist societyrdquo (1982120) It has the potential for overcoming thecentral inadequacies of Marxist theory concerning issues of working classcomplacency the failures of existing socialism the rise of nationalist andreligious movements and the continuing problems of race sex andecology (Aronowitz 19829ndash12 68ndash69 120ndash121)

As a primary point of theoretical departure Althusserrsquos theory hasreceived increasing amounts of criticism (which we will elaborate in thefollowing sections) In general the theory is marred by a stagnant func-tionalism which overstates the unity of ideology and conceptually dis-places subjection to counter-hegemonic ideologies and resulting ideologicalstruggles It tends to reduce ideologies of race sex and nation to classideologies and does not come to grips with social relations outside of pro-duction or the state The question remains whether the theoryrsquos poten-tial can be reached by expanding it to incorporate new concepts whichovercome its limitations or whether the basic conceptual frameworkshould be gutted saving only those speci c concepts which have provenuseful

Althusser

The key question which introduces Althusserrsquos discussion of ideologyis ldquohow is the reproduction of the relations of production securedrdquo

Critical Sociology 2523

recent developments in marxist theories of ideology 359

(1971128) He notes that for this to occur two separate conditions mustbe met (1) skills and knowledge required for speci c positions in thetechnical division of labor must be reproduced and (2) the submissionof laborers to the ldquorules of the established orderrdquo (1971127) must alsobe reproduced

The answer Althusser provides to this question is that the relationsof production are reproduced by ldquothe legal-political and ideologicalsuperstructurerdquo (1971141) He retains the basesuperstructure analogysince it allows him to represent the relative autonomy and reciprocaleVectivity of the three diVerent levels or instances in a social formation(economic political ideological)1 while maintaining the determinationin the last instance of the economic base Two components of Althusserrsquosessay have in uenced all subsequent Marxist discussion about ideology(1) his theory of the microstructure of ideology based on the ldquocreationof subjectsrdquo and (2) his analysis of the ldquoIdeological State Apparatusesrdquo(ISAs)2 Our emphasis is on the former though we will touch upon ISAsA full investigation of ISAs would require elaboration of Althusserrsquos the-ory of the state which is not our subject (and which we nd to be aproblematic concept)

Althusser begins his discussion of ideology by making a distinctionbetween ldquoideology in generalrdquo and ldquoparticular ideologiesrdquo (1971150)The study of particular ideologies is necessarily historical and thus can-not take place outside the context of concrete social formations Populistideologies for example have in diVerent times and places been associ-ated with fascism socialism and competitive capitalism According toAlthusser these particular ideologies always express class position regard-less of their form (1971150) Althusserrsquos project is to develop a theoryof ideology in general which he argues ldquohas no historyrdquo (1971151)Ideology in general is an omnihistorical reality de ned by its structureand function in the same manner as is Freudrsquos concept of the unconscious3

Ideology in general functions to reproduce the conditions of pro-duction4 This is done through interpellating subjects such that theycome to represent their real conditions of existence to themselves in animaginary form This form allows subjects to make sense of their par-ticular lived experiences by making existing social relations seem uni-versal timeless and natural (taken-for-granted) The object of ideologyis lived experience Althusser contrasts ideology with science whose objectis the structures and patterns of experiences Scienti c practice producestheoretical knowledge while ideological practice only provides ldquoknow-howrdquo that is practical knowledge and common sense

360 terry e boswell edgar v kiser kathryn a baker

Constituting Subjects

The constitution of subjects occurs through interpellation Interpellationis a process of ldquohailingrdquo that precedes the birth of the individual (oneis born with a name sex family and so on) and continues throughoutonersquos lifetime (1971165) Each individual is ldquoalways alreadyrdquo a subjectwho comes to recognize oneself through various ritual practices (suchas naming greeting praying voting etc) as concrete distinguishableand irreplaceable This recognition which transforms all individuals intosubjects is the concrete condition for the individuals misrecognition ofonersquos real conditions of existence (or which is the same thing the recog-nition of an imaginary relation to those real relations) Thus the processof interpellation is a dual process of recognition-misrecognition consti-tutive of individuals as subjects The recognition by the individual sub-ject of imaginary relations of harmony freedom and individual eYcacyentails the simultaneous misrecognition of relations of con ict and exploita-tion which characterizes all class societies

The term subject in ordinary usage has a dual meaning It means(1) a free subjectivity an independent center of initiatives author ofand responsible for onersquos actions and (2) a subjected being who sub-mits to a higher authority and is therefore stripped of all freedom Theconstitution of subjects is always and necessarily relational since it pre-supposes the existence of a unique ldquoOther Subjectrdquo in relation to whomsubjects are de ned We are following Althusser in using Subject with acapital ldquoSrdquo to refer to the de ning subject and subject with a small ldquosrdquoto refer to ordinary constituted subjects

The ldquoSubject-subjectrdquo relation is both symbiotic and asymmetrical Theexistence of the Subject is predicated on the constitution of subjects justas the existence of subjects depends on their relation to the SubjectBut the relation is asymmetrical in that being a subject through theSubject entails a relation of dominance-subjection in that a subject canonly become such by being subjected to the Subject (1971167) Althussertakes religious ideology as an example in which ldquoGodrdquo is the Subjectthrough which religious subjects are constituted The relation ldquoSubject-subjectrdquo exists within each ideological region ( juridico-political familialeducational religious etc)5

Ideology constitutes individuals who will more or less submit to theexisting order The manner in which this subjection is accomplishedvaries in diVerent types of social formations In some social formationsindividuals may be aware of their subjection but accept it as legitimateor at least inescapable In capitalist social formations the emphasis given


to the individual as subject in the rst sense obscures subjection as sub-ject in the second sense the individual perceives submission as freelychosen Hence lies the power of ideology in capitalist social formationsthe production of subjects whose imaginary relation to real relations isthat of initiators of action The consequence of subjection is thus theldquofreerdquo choice of continued subjection This is the material preconditionof the reproduction of capitalist relations of production We nd themost obvious example of this ideology in the fundamental assumptionof individual choice in neoclassical economics where for instance theunemployed are seen as choosing leisure over wages

The consequence of subjection for individual subjects is the guaranteethat everything is as it seems to be Thus the constitution of individu-als as subjects results in the outcome of ldquosubjection-guarantee rdquo The out-come of this process is that the individualrsquos imaginary relation to realrelations will be materially reproduced

The Materiality of Ideology

As a process rather than a system of ideas ideology is given a mate-rial existence and can be studied as such Ideology is material in thatit consists of rituals practices and actions that constitute the process ofinterpellation As such ideology is ubiquitous It serves to insert sub-jects into the practical activities of life according to the relations of themode of production thus reproducing those relations According toAlthusser reproduction is guaranteed by the state through RepressiveState Apparatuses and Ideological State Apparatuses The former func-tion primarily by violence while the latter function primarily by ideol-ogy (1971138) Included among the Ideological State Apparatuses (ISAs)are the educational system family religion trade unions and commu-nication systems Of these Althusser argues that education has becomethe most important for reproducing the relations of production andinterpellating subjects

Altogether these ISAs are both the stake and the site of ideologicalclass struggle (1971140) By inference RSAs should be the stake andsite of political class struggle though Althusser does not explicitly acknowl-edge this An immediate problem with this conception is Althusserrsquos the-ory of the state In this instance he has essentially equated state andsuperstructure We will examine the problem with this overextension ofthe state later (in the section on Urry)6

Althusserrsquos theory of ideology departs substantially from previousMarxist treatments of ideology The fact that ideology has a material

existence means that it can no longer be viewed as an epiphenomenalre ection of the economic base He also broadens the Marxist frame-work in such a way as to make ideology a central concept This expan-sion enables him to incorporate many non-Marxist insights into thetheory In this way he enriches the Marxist perspective while at thesame time enhancing the utility of these borrowed notions One cansee Althusserrsquos debt to neo-Freudians particularly Lacan in the recon-ceptualization of ideology as a dynamic ongoing process through whichsubjects are created Althusser has thus laid the groundwork for thedevelopment of a Marxist concept of ideology radically diVerent fromthose theories which proceeded it The number of prominent Marxisttheorists who have elaborated on as well as criticized Althusserrsquos theoryattests to its importance

Poulantzas

Poulantzasrsquo contribution to the theory of ideology is largely that ofan elaboration departing from Althusser much less than the other the-orists we will review Poulantzas elaborates on the function of ideologyby developing the theory at the level of the social formation (19731974) He is less concerned with the ldquomicrordquo analysis regarding how class sub-jects become constituted and more concerned with specifying the rela-tionship between class ideologies and the dominant ideology in a socialformation In doing so he resolves the apparent contradiction betweentwo versions of ideology found in Marxist theory (1) that social beingdetermines social consciousness and (2) that ldquothe ideas of the ruling classare in every epoch the ruling ideasrdquo (Marx 196947 also 25)

The rst version views ideology as lived experience The diVerentlived relations of each class determine the way class subjects perceiveand give meaning to life The second version is based on the idea thatthe ruling class is able to impose its belief system on the subordinateclasses thus inhibiting the development of a working class ideologyIdeology as a vehicle of domination distorts the real conditions of sub-ordination and thereby conceals the real interests of the subordinateclasses In this view ideology is de ned as false-consciousness ratherthan consciousness These diVerent perspectives lead to potentially con-tradictory conclusions In the rst case one would expect the classes tohave very diVerent ideologies in the second the ideology of the sub-ordinate class should approximate the world-view of the dominant class(for a discussion see Abercrombie and Turner 1978)


Poulantzas addresses precisely this problem when he states that mostearlier versions of ideology from Lukacs on have serious ambiguities anderrors that result from the con ation of several diVerent issues (1973197ndash204) Both the above conceptualizations of ideology have been charac-terized by the failure to allow for the relative autonomy of the ideo-logical instance resulting in a tendential equating of economic positionand class ideology in the rst version and dominant class and dominantideology in the second This tendency to reduce the ideological instanceto the economic instance has consequently obscured the relationship ofthe dominant ideology to both the dominant and subordinate classes

Poulantzas argues that there are two levels of ideology rst there areprimary class ideologies and ideological sub-ensembles of minor classeswhich encompass distinct world views7 and secondly apart from theseclass ideologies there exists a dominant ideology which reproduces rela-tions in the social formation as a whole Poulantzas argues that thedominant ideology is a product of class struggle Therefore many ide-ological elements from the subordinate classes are incorporated into thedominant ideology Typically though the dominant ideology is domi-nated by the ideology of the dominant class since the structure of socialrelations is such that this class usually prevails in class struggles

In reality the dominant does not simply re ect the interests and con-ditions of the dominant class but rather the complex political relationshipsamong the factions of the dominant class and between the dominantand subordinate classes In this way it serves the dual purpose of organ-izing the dominant class while co-opting and disorganizing the subor-dinate classes This relation is encompassed in the concept hegemonywhereby the dominant class manages to represent itself both as inter-nally uni ed and as unifying the general interests of the people

While the dominant ideology is usually dominated by the ideologyof the dominant class this is not a necessary relationship It is possiblefor dislocations to occur due to the relative autonomy of the ideologicalthe political and the economic instances Poulantzas (1974) illustratesan historical instance of ideological dislocation in his analysis of fascismFascism in Germany and Italy was the product of a simultaneous polit-ical crisis (crisis of hegemony) and ideological crisis (crisis of the dom-inant ideology) The subordinate classes were then in a position toreplace the dominant ideology with one more adapted to their inter-ests In the case of both Germany and Italy the working class was alsoundergoing ideological crisis resulting in the petty bourgeoisie assum-ing the leading role in forging a new dominant ideology


Poulantzasrsquo distinction between the ideology of the dominant classand the dominant ideology resolves the confusion entailed in viewingideology as ldquolived experiencerdquo as well as a mechanism which tends toobscure the real relations of production Class ideologies are productsof the lived experiences of each class The dominant ideology is a prod-uct of class struggle and by virtue of its function in class societies mustconceal real contradictions It is through concealment that the domi-nant ideology functions to maintain the social formation by presentingthe particular lived relations of agents as a part of a relatively coher-ent unitymdashldquoas opposed to science ideology has the precise function ofhiding the real contradictions of reconstituting on an imaginary level arelatively coherent discourse which serves as the horizon of agentrsquos expe-riencerdquo (1973207) 8

That the limited horizon of ideology obscures recognition of contra-dictory class interests does not mean that all struggle is excluded Onthe contrary Poulantzas states that

the dominance of this ideology is shown by the fact that the dominatedclasses live their conditions of political existence through the forms of dom-inant political discourse often they live even their revolt against the dom-ination of the system within the frame of reference of the dominantlegitimacy (1973223)

Poulantzas criticizes previous Marxist theorizing for generally over-stating the function of ideology What he calls the ldquoLukacsian prob-lematicrdquo represents ideology as creating the unity of a social formationrather than re ecting it (1973197ndash201) It does so by falling prey toan historicist interpretation of hegemony According to this problem-atic a ldquohegemonic class becomes the class-subject of history whichthrough its world-view manages to permeate a social formation with itsunity and to lead rather than dominate by bringing about the lsquoactiveconsentrsquo of the dominated classesrdquo (1973199) Under such a concep-tion the subordinate classes would have the same world-view as thedominant class It would be this universal world-view which determinedsocial relations

Ideological Regions

In describing the dominant ideology of capitalist social formationsPoulantzas notes the particular importance of juridical-political relationsHe states that the dominant ideology has a variety of ideological regionssuch as juridical-political moral aesthetic religious technocratic and


so on The dominant ideology will be characterized by the dominanceof one of these regions such that all other regions are articulated inrelation to it This ldquoarticulating regionrdquo will fall to the one which isbest suited to mask the real relations of exploitation and therefore bestserves the role of cohesion (1973210ndash215) For capitalism the juridi-cal-political is the articulating region

In his last book Poulantzas (1980) discusses the role of the law injuridical-political ideology He argues that the law ldquomaterializes the dom-inant ideologyrdquo (198083) It does so in such a way that social relationsare mysti ed as individual relations Since the law itself is unknowableto all but intellectuals of the state the people become further mysti edAs such the law reproduces the division between intellectual and man-ual labor condensing it in the state In a particularly illuminating pas-sage Poulantzas points out that

no-one should be ignorant of the lawmdashthat is the fundamental maxim of themodern judicial system in which no-one but the state representatives areable to know the law This knowledge required of every citizen is not evena special subject of study at school (198089ndash90)

Poulantzasrsquo argument that the juridical-political masks the real rela-tions of dominancesubordination is convincing but is only a restate-ment of what has previously been pointed out by McPherson (1961)and others What is less convincing is that the articulating region is nec-essarily that region which best serves to mask these relations There isno internal mechanism in this schema which explains how such a regionbecomes the articulating region only that it will not correspond to thedominant instance of the social formation Poulantzasrsquo argument is exces-sively functionalist lacking class or historical contingencies despite thefact that he cites Weberrsquos historical analysis of the role of juridical-polit-ical ideology in the origins of capitalist formations (1973212)

The articulation of ideological elements within the dominant ideol-ogy is a key issue and in our view masking contradictions is not anadequate explanation Juridical-political notions dominated the ideolo-gy of the rising bourgeoisie before the capitalist formation came intobeing Thus it could not have been functioning primarily to mask con-tradictions in this yet nonexistent social formation The incipient juridi-cal-political ideology of the rising bourgeoisie was aimed as much atexposing and destroying the dominant (ie political) instance of the feu-dal formation as it was at bringing about favorable conditions for a newsocial formation based on a capitalist mode of production The articu-lating ideological region would appear to arise out of class struggle not



structural determinism Moreover class struggle between competing dom-inant classes and class factions may be more important in determiningthe articulating region than struggle between the dominant and domi-nated classes (cf Abercrombie and Turner 1978)

We nd the lack of historically contingent causal arguments to bethe central problem with the theory of ideology as elaborated by Althusserand Poulantzas As a result the theory tends to lapse into explanationsbased upon stagnant functionalism or simple domination by capitalandor the state We agree with Giddens (1981) who claims that underthis approach human agents tend to appear ldquoas lsquocultural dopesrsquo not asactors who are highly knowledgeable about the institutions they pro-duce and reproducerdquo (198118 see also 15ndash25 42ndash47 215ndash220) Ofparticular importance is the lack of an adequate analysis of ideologicalstruggle as a causal factor in theory This is especially true of Althusserbut even Poulantzasrsquo analysis of struggle (most evident in his later works)is plagued by severe limitations In general these limitations are the ulti-mate reduction of all struggle to class struggle and the placing of classstruggle within the framework of the dominant ideology

Before reviewing recent works which start with the insights of Althusserand Poulantzas we will brie y outline the key elements of their theory(condensed from Poulantzas 1973199ndash224 198363ndash93)

1 Ideology consists of a relatively coherent ensemble of representa-tions values and beliefs This ensemble re ects the relations of agentsto the conditions in which they live in an imaginary form

2 At the level of lived relations ideology serves as the horizon ofagentrsquos experience Thus ideology is necessarily false and inadequate forproviding scienti c knowledge

3 Ideology is materialized in rituals rules styles fashionsmdashie theway of life for a society It is present in all activities and indistinguish-able from onersquos lived experience

4 These material practices interpellate subjects so as to insert them intopractical activities which support the social structure while the structureitself remains opaque

5 At the level of a social formation there are ideologies which cor-respond to classes and the dominant ideology which is a product of classstruggle The dominant ideology typically will be most consistent withthe ideology of the dominant class

6 The unity of the dominant ideology re ects the unity of the socialformation reconstituted on an imaginary plane By presenting their livedexperiences to subjects as part of a relatively contradiction-free coherentensemble the dominant ideology provides cohesion to the social formation

7 The dominant ideology is characterized by an articulating regionwhich best serves to conceal social contradictions Under capitalism thisis the juridical political region It is materialized in the law

It is clear that Althusser and Poulantzas have overcome many of theshortcomings that have hindered Marxist theoretical development Thefollowing theorists attempt to reconstruct this theory of ideology in sucha way as to resolve some of the remaining shortcomings To a notabledegree each work stresses the causal importance of human agency non-class ideologies and multi-faceted struggles

Recent Theoretical Developments Therborn Laclau and Urry

Therborn

Goran Therborn in The Ideology of Power and the Power of Ideology (1980)has both expanded upon and trenchantly criticized Althusserrsquos (1971)theoretical work on the structure and function of ideology Although helocates his essay in a theoretical ldquoconjuncture of Marxist discourse onideology opened by Althusserrdquo (19807) Therborn notes the necessityof ldquoa break from the lingering restrictions of Althusserrsquos problematicrdquoin order to facilitate ldquoa shift or broadening of the object of inquiry fromthe role of ideology in the reproduction of exploitation and power tothe generation reproduction and transformation of ideologiesrdquo (198010)Note that Therborn has shifted the object of study from both ldquoideolo-gies in generalrdquo and the ldquodominant ideologyrdquo to particular ideologiesand their interrelations This theoretical departure allows Therborn toaddress con ict between ideologies and ideological transformations Thisis accomplished by (1) introducing into the notion of interpellation thepotential for con ict (2) noting the material forces which govern therelative power of competing ideologies and (3) distinguishing betweenvarious dimensions of ideology and the manner in which these enterinto ideological debate

Therborn (1980) accepts the Althusserian emphasis on ideology as aprocess of interpellating subjects through largely unconscious psychody-namic processes (19802) He de nes ideology as ldquothat aspect of thehuman condition under which human beings live their lives as con-scious actors in a world that makes sense to them to varying degreesrdquo(19802) However Therborn develops a very diVerent sense of the dual-ity of that process He argues that Althusserrsquos couplet subjection-guar-antee ldquoallows no room for any dialectic of ideologyrdquo (198016) andshould be replaced by ldquosubjection-qualicationrdquo (198017)


Subjection-Qualication

For Althusser the de nition of a ldquosubjectrdquo as an actor or creator of some-thing is an imaginary relation that makes the real relation of subjectionpossible Therborn argues that subjects really are creative actors in thatideology not only subjects them to relations of exploitation but alsoqualies them to ldquotake up and perform (a particular part of ) the reper-toire of roles given in the society into which they are born including therole of possible agents of social changerdquo (198017 emphasis added) For exam-ple although the educational process subjects students to a ldquohiddenagendardquo which serves to reproduce acquiescence to exploitative rela-tions it also quali es students as agents of social change by providingthem with the writing and analytical skills necessary for the develop-ment of counter-hegemonic ideologies

Ideological con ict is generated by a lack of correspondence betweensubjection and quali cation This can happen in one of two ways ldquoNewkinds of quali cation may be required and provided new skills thatclash with the traditional forms of subjection Or conversely new formsof subjection may develop that clash with the provision of still neededquali cationsrdquo (Therborn 198017)

Therborn has improved upon Althusserrsquos static notion of subjection-guarantee by allowing for change through the actions of ldquoquali edrdquosubjects The potential for change corresponds to the degree of non-correspondence between the mechanisms of subjection and those ofquali cation

Another important theoretical advance is Therbornrsquos conceptualiza-tion of the individual character of all ideologies According to Therborneach particular ideology includes a simultaneous de nition of self andother which he refers to as ego and alter ideologies respectively Forexample Therborn refers to sexist ideology which requires both a pos-itive de nition of the male ldquoegordquo and a negative de nition of the femaleldquoalterrdquo Therefore feminist ideological struggles entail a simultaneousrede nition of both alter and ego and thus potential con ict betweenmen and women Yet ideological struggles are never this clear-cut Eachindividual subject consists of the articulation of multiple ego and alterideologies The crucial aspect of ideological struggle is the articulationof a given ideology with other ideologies

The functioning of subjection-quali cation involves three modes ofideological interpellation which correspond to the answers to three fun-damental questions (1) What exists (2) What is good and (3) What


is possible The answers to these questions provide ldquosuccessive lines ofdefense of a given orderrdquo (198019) Therborn uses poverty to illustratehis point First the existence of poverty can be denied (or minimized)If this fails and the existence of poverty must be admitted it can beargued that poverty is just since the poor are all inept or lazy anddeserve no better Third if the existence and injustice of poverty mustbe admitted it can be argued that a better social order is not possibleor at least not under current conditions

Therbornrsquos typology points out the limitations in other theories ofideology which do not recognize the distinct ways these levels functionThe traditional ldquoliberalrdquo approach to the study of ideology concentrateson ldquolegitimationrdquo and ldquoconsensusrdquo or in the above terms on ldquowhat isgoodrdquo ignoring the fact that this question is premised on a certainde nition of reality that is ldquowhat existsrdquo The traditional Marxist cri-tique of ldquoliberalerdquo theory recognizes this problem and has been gener-ally successful in reintroducing debate concerning the rst question YetMarxists have often intentionally de-emphasized the question of ldquowhatis possiblerdquo due in part to the criticism of nonscienti c Utopian Socialismfound in Marx and Engels (1969134ndash136) We feel this is a mistakeand that Therborn has opened up an important arena of debate for atheory which is aimed at pressing beyond ldquoliberalrdquo reforms (for exam-ple see Kiser 1985 Kiser and Baker 1984)

The Material Matrix of Ideology

Therborn de nes ideology as a discursive practice that is inscribedin a non-discursive material matrix of aYrmations and sanctions Discursiveand non-discursive practices are always empirically intertwined how-ever he argues that analytically separating the two is essential to anunderstanding of ideological con ict and transformation (198033) Anyideology disposes the actor to develop certain modes of thought andrationalities deriving from that ideology Acting upon these rationalitieswill result in material consequences The consequences of onersquos actionsare evaluated along the dimensions of whether they were advantageousor disadvantageous in comparison to an alternative set of beliefs It isthis material matrix which determines the relative power of ideologies(198033ndash35)

The concept of a material matrix of aYrmations and sanctions givessubstance to the notion of the ldquomateriality of ideologyrdquo while avoidingAlthusserrsquos radial claim that ideology is only material practices and not


ideas It also provides a framework for Althusserrsquos notion of ldquoguaran-teerdquo addressing the material conditions which contribute or do not con-tribute to the achievement of this guarantee

Therborn retains Althusserrsquos conception of ideology as lived experi-ence but rejects the implication that experience of social relations isnecessarily imaginary Ideology for Therborn is not restricted to illusionsand misrecognition Therefore he rejects the distinction between scienceand ideology (19804) He notes that the science-ideology dichotomyrests on the notion that an individualrsquos perception of onersquos lived rela-tions either corresponds (science) or does not correspond (ideology) toreality Therborn criticizes this opposition between science and ideol-ogy as only echoing the traditional distinction between true and falseconsciousness He claims these are a ldquoutilitarian residue in Marxismwhich should be rejected explicitly and decisively once and for allrdquo(19805)

Therbornrsquos argument (19804ndash10) leads to a position we can char-acterize as ldquonormative relativismrdquo He holds that it is an untenableassumption ldquothat normative conceptions are given in the reality ofexistence and are accessible only through true knowledge of the latterrdquo(19805) Instead Therborn states that interests are constituted in andby ideology depending upon the material matrix of aYrmations andsanctions Consequently all class interests are only subjective there beingno objective interests determined by real conditions which lie beyondconscious recognition

We consider Therbornrsquos point to be well taken but it has two majorshortcomings First he does not suYciently specify the relation of thematrix of aYrmations and sanctions to the ldquorealrdquo structurally deter-mined positions of classes in production Secondly Therbornrsquos theorysuVers from not incorporating Poulantzasrsquo conception of ideology asconstituting the horizon of onersquos experience Because of this omission hecannot explain how onersquos lived experience does not provide adequateknowledge of the ldquorealrdquo social structural relations such as classes andmodes of production

Although much of Therbornrsquos work on ideology suVers from hisemphasis-abstract classi cation at the expense of detailed analysis hehas advanced the discussion of ideology in signi cant ways His choiceof taking particular ideologies and their interrelations as his object ofanalysis as opposed to Althusserrsquos emphasis on ldquoideology in generalrdquohas allowed him to theorize about ideological con ict and change Indenying the idea of real class interests he also denies that ideologyinvolves misrecognition The concept of ideology broadened in Althusserrsquos


reconceptualization from false consciousness to recognitionmisrecogni-tion is further broadened by Therbornrsquos conceptualization of it asde nitions of reality their normative evaluations and the assessment ofconceivable alternatives Therbornrsquos work is also characterized by amovement away from an exclusive emphasis on class ideologies Thistendency is taken further in the recent work of Laclau and Urry

Laclau

The work of Ernesto Laclau (1977a 1977b 1982) epitomizes thetransformations that have occurred in Marxist theories of ideology withinthe Althusserian framework Laclau retains Althusserrsquos emphasis on theideological interpellation of subjects as the unifying principle of ideol-ogy However he argues that the process of interpellating subjectsthrough ldquohailingrdquo does not always result in subjection to the existingsocial order but also characterizes anti-hegemonic ideologies Laclauclaims for example (1977a101) that hailing occurs in communist dis-course such as Marxrsquos famous nale to the Communist Manifesto ldquoWorkersof all countries uniterdquo He criticizes Althusser for reducing all ideologyto the dominant ideology by concentrating on ldquoideology in generalrdquoLaclau is more concerned with how particular ideologies are createdand transformed and with specifying the interrelations between thesediverse subjectivities

Laclau also broadens the referent of ideology (even more so thanTherborn) to include non-class interpellations such as those which formthe basis of popular-democratic struggles These are struggles betweenthe power-bloc and ldquothe peoplerdquo (all groups outside the political powerbloc) as well as struggles against racial sexual and ethnic oppressionAccording to Laclau this is a complete break with the class reduc-tionism which characterized Althusserrsquos theory

Ideological Articulation and Hegemony

For Laclau the meaning of particular ideologies depends on theirposition within the totality of ideological discourse Therefore the mostimportant feature of an analysis of ideology is an explanation of thenonarbitrary ways in which various ideologies are interrelated In orderto do this Laclau implements and elaborates Gramscirsquos concept of hege-mony According to Laclau ldquohegemony is not an external relationbetween preconstituted social agents but the very process of discur-sive construction of those agentsrdquo (1982100) This process of construct-ing social agents involves the uni cation of the diverse interpellations


(gender class race etc) which characterize any individual by a ldquospeci carticulating principlerdquo This gives each of these interpellations a speci cmeaning in relation to all other interpellations Hegemony is the impo-sition of an articulating principle upon an ensemble of social relationslinking them together

In his earlier works (1977a108ndash109 1977b164) Laclau argues thatthis articulating principle must belong to a class de ned by its positionwithin the dominant mode of production in a social formation Morerecently (1982100) he has allowed for the possibility of nonclass artic-ulating principles becoming hegemonic In doing so Laclau stresses theimportance for Marxist theory to incorporate the analysis of nonclasssubjection and struggle He leaves open the question of ultimate classarticulation to historical rather than functional analysis10 This is a vastimprovement over Poulantzasrsquo analysis of the ldquoarticulating regionrdquo

The implications of Laclaursquos discussion of hegemony is that ideolog-ical struggle cannot be viewed as a process of counterposing a pureMarxist-Leninist ldquoworking-classrdquo ideology to the dominant ldquobourgeoisrdquoideology Instead it involves (1) dislodging certain elements that havebeen articulated into the discourse of the dominant class (eg democ-racy) and (2) de ning these elements in relation to a new articulatingprinciple We nd Alan Wolfersquos (1977) analysis of the contradictionsbetween liberalism and democracy is an example of the former whileHerbert Gintisrsquo (1980) discussion of the meaning of liberal democracyis a proposal to do the latter

Laclau views the dominant contradiction in the social formation asthat between ldquothe peoplerdquo and the power bloc (1977a108)11 Thereforethe outcome of ideological struggles between classes depends on theability of each class to present itself as the authentic representative ofldquothe peoplerdquo (ie the ldquonational interestrdquo) (1977b161) Through hisreconceptualization of the nature of hegemony Laclau is able to accountfor both the existence of many competing partial ideologies (pluralism)and the fact that the articulation of these ideologies in a speci c man-ner is accomplished via struggle and the resulting hegemonic ideology

Urry

Although Laclau rejects much of Althusserrsquos theory of ideology heretains the de nition of a social formation as consisting of three levelsor instances economic political and ideological John Urryrsquos (1982)recent analysis of the structure of capitalist social formations abandonsthis classi cation for one that stresses the importance of Gramscirsquos (1971)


concept of civil society Urry severely criticizes Althusserrsquos basic theoryof the instances of a mode of production particularly the concept ofan ideological instance Whereas Althusser (1971129 131 1970138178ndash179 320) was attempting to rescue the basesuperstructure analogyfrom its stagnant Stalinist interpretation Urry is arguing that the ldquonotionsof basesuperstructure or of the economicpoliticalideological shouldbe placed once-and-for-all in the dustbin of historyrdquo (1982153) Thesenotions lead to three crucial problems in Marxist theory (1) the failureto recognize the importance of separating reproduction from produc-tion (2) the improper conception of an ideological instance (or dominantideology) as uni ed in the same sense as the state or production and(3) the overextension of the state to include all ideological apparatuses

According to Urry Althusserrsquos three relatively autonomous instancescan be abandoned without falling back into economic reductionism12

Capitalist social formations should instead be conceived of as compris-ing the state production and civil society Urry claims that the con-cept of civil society avoids the problems associated with the ideologicalinstance We will review this concept and examine its implications forthe theory of ideology

Civil Society

Urry de nes civil society as the ldquosite where individual subjects repro-duce their material conditions of liferdquo (19826) It consists of threespheresmdashcirculation reproduction and struggle Jointly these spherescomprise that set of social practices in which agents are constituted assubjects Under capitalism these spheres of civil society are separatefrom production (and the state) The separation of civil society fromproduction derives from the fact that surplus labor takes a value formwhich creates ldquoa separate realm of circulation in which surplus-value isrealized a sphere of exchange in which all commodities including thatof labor-power are bought and soldrdquo (198229) Furthermore capital-ist production and the state each have a distinct unity based on theproduction of surplus-value in the former and a monopoly of organizedforces in the latter but civil society has no such unity Urry argues thatAlthusserrsquos concept of the ideological state apparatuses (ISAs) overex-tends the state depriving it of its distinct nature and robbing theoristsof an important conceptual tool13 He suggests that much of whatAlthusser considers ISAs and most of what orthodox sociology is con-cerned with (such as relations of race religion gender and generation)should be viewed as institutions and practices of civil society



This does not mean that civil society is completely autonomous fromproduction or the state Production is connected to civil society throughthe circulation of capital and labor-power The medium of this circu-lation is money Likewise the state is connected to civil society throughthe circulation of power and ideology The medium of this circulationis the law (1982115ndash116) The concept of the law operating as a mediumbetween the state and civil society is an intriguing idea but underde-veloped Relations between the state and civil society outside of the law(such as illegal repression) have no place in Urryrsquos conception Nor doeshe explain the role of lawyers and judges (the organic intellectuals oflegal discourse) in popular-democratic struggles a role which Poulantzas(1980) considers substantial

Ideological Struggle and the Unity of Ideology

Since civil society is separate from production it may contain modesof subjection which do not necessarily reproduce production and mayeven be contrary to its reproduction at least in the short run (1982119ndash123) Reproduction is therefore not predetermined but instead a matterof struggle Moreover civil society contains various institutionsmdashfamilymarket church schools etc Thus struggles over reproduction cannotbe reduced to class struggles

Urry claims that Althusserrsquos theory of ideology suVers from an inertfunctionalism since it implies that reproduction is ldquoautomaticrdquo and ldquosostructured that it is the most functionally appropriate for social relationsof capitalist productionrdquo (198252) Like Therborn and Laclau he notesthat struggles over reproduction of labor-power (class-struggle) and strug-gle over reproduction of the power-bloc (popular-democratic struggle)is absent from Althusserrsquos theory14 According to Urry the notion ofthe ideological instance does not include a well-de ned arena for strug-gle over reproduction The concept of civil society provides this arena

Given ideology does not automatically reproduce capitalist relationsbut instead consists of disparate practices which may or may not repro-duce production (or may simply be irrelevant to it) then there is alsono basis for assuming a uni ed ideological instance Urry contends thatthe material practices which interpellate subjects should be conceivedas practices in civil society and nothing more There is no dominantideology since ldquoclass practices may or may not overlap with that ofother classes There may or may not be relations of domination betweendiVerent class practicesrdquo (198247) Urry even goes on to argue thatclass practices (such as ldquointerest ritual know-how symbols and illu-sions modes of thought and views of liferdquo) have no inherent unity and


therefore should not be considered class ideologies at all (198247) Asa result he claims there is no ideological instance only ideologicaleVects A social practice has an ideological eVect only when there is ldquoaconcealment of causes nature and consequences of that practice and this concealment is in the interests of one or more of the domi-nant social forcesrdquo (198245) Urry has thus restricted the concept ofideology to a distinct and more orthodox meaning

It is our position that his assertion that class practices ldquomay or maynot overlaprdquo and ldquomay or may not be relations of dominationrdquo does notinvalidate the existence of a uni ed pattern of ideological hegemony AsGramsci (1971161) states ldquothe fact of hegemony presupposes that accountbe taken of the interests and tendencies of the groups over which hege-mony is to be exercisedrdquo Therefore we would expect the dominantideology to include overlapping practices and relations of compromise

Urryrsquos conception of civil society represents an advance over Althusserrsquosideological instance in that con ict and struggle are made more centralbut Urryrsquos theory is not without diYculties His position regarding theseparation of production from struggles over reproduction in civil soci-ety is a decisive step in avoiding reductionism (see Giddens 1982 fora diVerent argument with similar conclusions) However struggle in pro-duction does not have a clear conceptual location in Urryrsquos theorySince class struggle in production is not examined the determinanteVects of production on circulation and reproduction are underspeci edUrry claims that ideology is everywhere (198231) we claim the sameis true of struggle

Discussion

Recent Marxist theories of ideology have moved in three major direc-tions since the theoretical conjuncture opened up by Althusser Thesethree directions are (1) a movement away from functionalist theories ofreproduction and towards an analysis of quali ed actors (2) a critiqueof class reductionism and emphasis on non-class struggles and (3) areconceptualization of the meaning of misrecognition and the impor-tance of concealment in de ning ideology and a move toward a morerestrictive de nition of ideology

Functionalism

All of the recent theories incorporate Althusserrsquos fundamental premisethat the constitution of subjects always takes place within ideology andthat there is no inherent essence to class subjects outside of or prior to

ideology However they all break to relative degrees within his positionthat ideology necessarily functions to reproduce the relations of productionThe problems with this position are most evident in Althusserrsquos conceptof ldquosubjection-guaranteerdquo If ideology reproduces the relations of pro-duction through subjecting all subjects and guaranteeing to them thateverything is as it seems then there is no place for ideological struggle Tobe sure Althusser makes no such assertion but he leaves no mechanism inhis analysis for non-reproduction Therbornrsquos (1980) concept of subjection-quali cation provides such a mechanism It retains the premise of ide-ological subjection but indicates that subjection quali es one to act andthus subjection and reproduction may not necessarily correspond

To a larger extent the functionalist tendencies in Althusser are theresult of the limits imposed by his object of study By choosing ldquoideol-ogy in generalrdquo as his object of study Althusser was not able to addresscon icts between particular ideologies In examining particular ideolo-gies each of the subsequent authors found it necessary to move in thedirection of including class struggle and historical contingency in theiranalysis Poulantzas (1973) argues that the dominant ideology is a resultof ideological class struggle and Laclau (1977a) emphasizes the impor-tance of subjection to counter-hegemonic ideologies Urry (1982) speaksto the notion of the unity of ideology Since Althusserrsquos (1971) asser-tion of unity is based on the function of ideology as reproduction toacknowledge that ideology contains nonreproductive practices thendestroys the basis of that unity Instead unity must come from othersources such as the nation-state as Poulantzas (1973) suggests

Each of these theorists argue that ideological subjection results fromideological struggle and does not automatically reproduce existing socialrelations Ideological dominance is contingent on successful elaborationand organization of the dominant ideology as well as cooptation or con-tainment of opposing ideologies This makes the role of intellectuals cen-tral to understanding ideology and ideological con ict A signi cantlacuna in all of the theories (with the partial exception of Poulantzas1973 and 1980) is an adequate analysis of the speci c role of intellec-tuals One can nd the beginnings of a theory of intellectuals in Gramscirsquos(19715ndash23) brilliant discussion of the role of traditional and organicintellectuals He realized that intellectuals have a signi cant and rela-tively autonomous position in the social structure and that their rela-tion to class forces is a signi cant determinant of the outcome ofideological con ict The theory of ideology needs to more fully addressthe role of intellectuals in the production of ideology and the processesby which it becomes transformed



Reductionism

The second direction taken by recent Marxist theories is the pro-gressive abandonment of both economic reductionism and class reduc-tionism Stalinist Marxism is reductionist in both senses viewing thesuperstructure as a re ection of the economic base and ideologies asre ections of the economic interests of particular social classes Althusser(1971) and Poulantzas (1973) break with economic reductionism by posit-ing the relative autonomy of the ideological and political levels of socialformations Yet both retain class reductionist de nitions of ideology ForAlthusser ideology reproduces class domination while for Poulantzas allideological elements have a speci c class character (1974)15 Therborn(1980) and Laclau (1977a) deny that all ideologies can be reduced toclass interests but argue that all ideologies are overdetermined by classideologies This is only a partial break with class reductionism

Urry (1982) and Laclau in a later discussion (1982) deny the necessaryprimacy of class ideologies over nonclass ideologies in con icts over hege-mony According to Urry (1982) there are many diVerent ideologicalstruggles within civil society and it is a contingent question as to whetherclass or nonclass ideological con icts will be more important in any par-ticular social formation Laclau (1982100) argues along similar lines thateither class or non-class articulating principles may form the basis ofhegemony

In part these positions are missing one another The diVerencesbetween these theorists partially re ect diVerences in their units of analy-sis Althusser (1971) is exclusively concerned with the reproduction ofthe relations of production whereas Laclau (1982) and Urry (1982) areconcerned with the reproduction of the social formation Political hege-mony cannot be reduced to class hegemony Attempts to do so obscurethe speci c nature of race sex national religious and other nonclassstruggles This does not mean that the mode of production does notstructure social relations in a social formation but only that not all socialrelations can be reduced to relations of production

Misrecognition and Concealment in Ideology

While the above discussions indicate a progressive abandonment offunctionalist tendencies and class reductionism the discussion of mis-recognition and concealment de nes ideology in ways that bring it closerto pre-Althusserian positions

The importance of concealment in ideology becomes increasinglysalient once reproduction is no longer considered to function automatically


According to Althusser misrecognition of real relations is guaranteednot because the dominant class conceals them but because real rela-tions cannot be recognized within ideology Ideology adequately repre-sents lived experience and adequately inserts subjects into their practicalactivities It is false not in its portrayal of surface appearances but inthat it only portrays surface appearances and not the underlying struc-tural relations which inform them In other words ideology is false inthat it is not science This is Althusserrsquos theoretical development ofLeninrsquos famous diction ldquothat the working class exclusively by its owneVort is able to develop only trade union consciousnessrdquo socialist con-sciousness ldquowould have to be brought to them from withoutrdquo (Lenin1970143)

If one allows that ideological subjection quali es a subject to creativelyact and produce counter-hegemonic ideologies then not all ideologicalsubjection ldquoconcealsrdquo in the sense of causing misrecognition of relationsof dominationsubjugation The question becomes whether ideologicalsubjection-quali cation which does not reproduce the existing relationsof domination (or is simply irrelevant to it) should be considered ide-ology at all Urry (1982) de nes ideology by its eVects of concealmentand labels other signifying practices that do not have these eVects asmerely practices in civil society Laclau (198298) refers to practiceswhich do not entail misrecognition as discursive practices It is not clearwhat meaning he gives to misrecognition but it appears to imply amore restricted de nition of ideology

Poulantzasrsquo (1973) distinction between ideology in general and speci cclass ideologies may help disentangle the notions of concealment andmisrecognition He considers ideology in general to be equivalent toculture (minus the termrsquos humanistic or functionalist connotations) Ideol-ogy as a general concept necessarily contains both real and false knowl-edge as a consequence of its limited horizon In accord with Althusserthis limitation necessarily involves simultaneous recognitionmisrecogni-tion and thus ideology is inherently ldquofalserdquo in contrast to scienceConcealment in the traditional sense of obscuring relations of domina-tionsubjugation (as emphasized by Urry 1982) consists of the exorbi-tant eVects of bourgeois ideology on the dominant ideology As a resultsubordinate class members are unable to clearly perceive their situationfrom their own vantage point and thus are unable to formulate theirown class-speci c ideology Therborn also points out that the dominantclass has a greater ability to organize experience and to structure thematerial matrix of aYrmations and sanctions which help maintain biaseswithin the dominant ideology An adequate conceptualization of ideol-

ogy must allow the possibility of counter-hegemonic ideologies whichperform the function of unmasking relations of dominationsubjugationThis is not to claim that counter-hegemonic ideologies necessarily pro-vide scienti c knowledge of the underlying structures which supportthese relations However counter-hegemonic ideologies which are informedby scienti c knowledge should achieve a greater long-term measure ofsuccess

The debate regarding misrecognition and concealment has importantimplications for the de nition of ideology Althusser and Poulantzasde ne ideology as (1) lived experience and (2) necessarily involving mis-recognition Their de nition avoids the usage of ideology as only rela-tively coherent systems of meaning and instead includes all socialpractices and beliefs as ideological elements It includes both the prac-tices referred to by Laclau as ldquodiscursiverdquo as well as the practices Urryclaims belong in civil society

Ideology is too broadly de ned by Althusser and Poulantzas and toonarrowly de ned by Urry The former theorists see ideology as ubiq-uitous reproduction practices which do not necessarily involve con-cealment while the latter restricts ideology to practices which concealthe interests of particular social groups The extent to which ideologyconceals or reveals underlying relations of domination-subordination isa question for historical investigation and not part of the de nition ofideology We accept Laclaursquos concept of the nonrandom articulation ofbeliefs and practices as the proper domain of ideology This view leavesopen the extent to which various ideologies actually conceal real socialrelations and also allows for the incorporation of Therbornrsquos conceptof the material matrix of aYrmations and sanctions that shapes (and isshaped by) ideological con ict in civil society

Conclusion

In conclusion our discussion of the new direction in Marxist theo-ries of ideology suggests several amendments to the elaborated Althusseriantheory we outlined earlier We nd that analysis of ideology wouldbene t from incorporation of at least six key concepts We will brie yde ne each of these and provide an example of what issues we feelthey illustrate The concepts are

1 The Subjection-Qualication Dialectic (Therborn 1980) Ideology sub-jects agents to the relations of exploitation but in the process it quali espeople for creative action within their positions in society (includingagents of social change and revolution) For example while trade unions


subject workers to the limits of an economistic perspective in the processunions also qualify workers to act as a class

2 Organic and Traditional Subjection-Qualication of Intellectuals (Gramsci1971) The role of intellectuals in struggles over hegemony is to elabo-rate on the horizon of knowledge and organize the correspondingaYrmations and sanctions There are two distinguishable types of intel-lectuals organic and traditional however this distinction does not nec-essarily correspond to their position in ideological struggle A currentexample of both organic and traditional intellectuals attempting to sus-tain a counter-hegemonic ideology is Lech Walensa and the KOR groupin Poland Many issues need to be addressed eg what qualitative fac-tors diVerentiate the constitution of organic and traditional intellectualsand what distinguishes their relation to ideological struggle

3 The Modes of Ideological Interpellation (Therborn 1980) Ideologieshave successive levels of interpellation which basically conform to thethree views of what exists what is good and what is possible (and theirnegationmdashwhat does not exist what is evil what is impossible) Forexample bourgeois concepts of human nature posit that only sel shpeople exist that the pursuit of self-interest is good and that a com-munal system is not possible

4 The Dual Character of Ideology (Therborn 1980) Each ideologicalexpression has its supporting inverse Thus an ideology contains simul-taneously ego and alter representations Racism for example containsboth an ego ideology of ldquowhite supremacyrdquo and an alter ideology ofblack inferiority

5 The People and Popular-Democratic Struggles (Laclau 1977a) The expres-sion of the interests of the power-bloc in the state organizes the inter-ests of those outside the power-bloc into a nonclass con guration ofldquothe peoplerdquo ldquoThe peoplerdquo struggle against the power-bloc for repre-sentation of their interests in the state Therefore these struggles areldquopopularrdquo (of the people) and ldquodemocraticrdquo (extend representation tothe masses) Since ldquothe peoplerdquo includes all groups outside the power-bloc ldquopopular-democraticrdquo struggles may include ideological expressionswhich are anti-working class For example fascism can be a ldquopopular-democraticrdquo ideology of the petty-bourgeoisie outside of an alliance withthe power-bloc

6 Civil Society (Urry 1982) Civil society is the space in which agentsare constituted as subjects and subjects function to reproduce the mate-rial conditions of their lives Capitalist production speci es that surplusvalue is realized and labor-power is reproduced in spheres outside ofproduction This does not function automatically surplus value distrib-


ution and the reproduction of labor-power are issues of struggle Forexample the primary unit of reproduction is the family whose struc-ture is neither a function of capitalist production nor the state A cen-tral con ict within the family is over the distribution of labor in productionof the use-values necessary for reproduction

The foregoing list of useful concepts represents the beginning of thedevelopment of Marxist theories of ideology Although a great deal ofprogress has been made since the orthodox relegation of ideology tothe epiphenomenal superstructure and Althusserrsquos early functionalismthere are still many important issues unresolved and many importantquestions yet to be addressed We hope that in summarizing and con-structively criticizing recent Marxist theoretical work on ideology wehave helped to lay the foundation for the future theoretical elaborationand historical application of these important concepts

Notes

The original version of this article appeared in The Insurgent Sociologist 134 (Summer1986) pp 5ndash22

1 Althusserrsquos reference to the ideological economic and political instances in hismethod for recognizing Marxism as a unique synthesis of German philosophy Englisheconomics and French politics This synthesis was constructed by Marx as the contin-uation and simultaneous surpassing of the previous world views It is a unique synthe-sis such that regardless of which instance one is examining at the time all three arepresent in a formative or preparatory sense (see Gramsci 1971399ndash401 Lenin 19433ndash9)

2 A full consideration of the issues raised by Althusserrsquos notion of Ideological StateApparatuses would involve an examination of the interface between the ideologicalinstance and the state which is beyond the scope of thin paper Furthermore Therborn(1980) Urry (1982) and even Althusser himself (1976) have pointed to the limitationsand distortions in this concept For these reasons we will not provide any extensive dis-cussion of Ideological State Apparatuses in this essay

3 The reference to the unconscious is more than just an analogy As Althusserpoints out (1969) ldquoideology has very little to do with lsquoconsciousnessrsquo It is profoundlyunconsciousrdquo One of Althusserrsquos important contributions has been to integrate psychoanalysisinto a Marxist problematic It is important to realize that for Althusser a completeMarxist theory of ideology requires this structuralist social psychology

4 As Burawoy (1979) has shown the function of reproduction also takes place withinthe economic base but this is not Althusserrsquos concern

5 Althusser does not provide examples of the Subject-subject relation in these otherregions even though he argues that the education-family couplet has replaced the reli-gion-family couplet as the dominant ISAs in capitalist societies It is unclear to us exactlyhow subjection operates in these regions as there are two possible interpretations Forexample in the region of education the student exists in a relation of dominance-sub-jection with the teacher Teacher-student but also each student in subjected to the con-cept of student Student-student

6 See also Andersonrsquos (1977) discussion of the in uence of one of Gramscirsquos con-ceptions of the exercise of hegemony by the state apparatus on Althusserrsquos concept ofIdeological State Apparatuses

7 Poulantzas states that only the two major classes of a given social formation have



relatively coherent ideologies Secondary classes are characterised by ideological sub-ensembles which eclectically spin together ideological elements from the major classideologies

8 Scienti c discourse does allow for contradictions which exist in social relations Itis in this sense that ideology in false not in the sense of false consciousness

9 Poulantzas (1973211) claims that ldquotechnocratismrdquo has become the articulatingregion under monopoly capitalism However he does not develop this point It is inter-esting to note that Bahro (1978) claims that in ldquoactually existing socialist countriesrdquo thepolitical bureacracy is the dominant instance of the mode of production and technoc-racy is the articulating region of the dominant ideology Technocracy in so employedas to justify and legitimate the bureacratic hierarchy

10 This calls into question the notion that the working class must be the ldquovanguardrdquoin any transition to socialism

11 See Poulantzas (1973) on the concept of the ldquopower blocrdquo12 Basically a reductionist theory does not allow for the relative autonomy of the

political and the ideological from the economic level Each political or ideological prac-tice of signi cance is conceived of as having a direct economic cause or re ecting theeconomic interests of a class Instrumentalism in political theory and economism in gen-eral tend to be reductionist theories (see Gramsci 1971158ndash168 for a discussion ofeconomism) An autonomous theory in conceptually the opposite of a reductionist theoryPolitics and ideologies are aVected by the economy (and vice versa) but there is nodetermination in the last instance of the economic Autonomous theories generally stemfrom Weberian in uences Since civil society is tied to the advent of capitalism it is ahistorically speci c concept Althusserrsquos theory of mode of production having threeinstances is an abstract conception without a ldquohistoryrdquo

13 According to Therborn (198085 133 note 36) in a personal communicationAlthusser stated he is no longer defending ISAs as such only the intrinsic link betweenideological apparatuses and the state This latter conception seems consistent with Urryrsquostheory of the role of the law although he rejects the centrality Althusser (1971) andPoulantzas (1973) give to the juridico-political ideology

14 The absence of an analysis of how class struggle aVects the ideological constitu-tion of subjects and thus the reproduction of society is a striking de ciency in Althusserrsquoswork noted by Hirst (1976) and even Althusser himself (1976)

15 We should note that Poulantzasrsquo (1973210ndash216) discussion of the various regionswithin the ideological instance is not class reductionist He argues that the various regionsare structured by class domination but cannot be reduced to class interests Howeverthis one example does not refute the argument that many components of his theorysuVer from class reductionism

References

Abercrombie Nicholas and Bryan S Turner 1978 ldquoThe Dominant Ideology ThesisrdquoBritish Journal of Sociology 29(2)149ndash167

Althusser Louis 1969 For Marx London New Left Booksmdashmdashmdash 1971 ldquoIdeology and Ideological State Apparatusesrdquo In Lenin and Philosophy

London New Left Booksmdashmdashmdash 1976 Essays in Self-Criticism London New Left BooksAlthusser Louis und Etienne Balibar 1970 Reading Capital London New Left BooksAnderson Perry 1976ndash77 ldquoThe Antinomies of Antonio Gramscirdquo New Left Review

1001ndash80Aronowitz Stanley 1982 The Crises of Historical Materialism New York PraegerBahro 1978 The Alternative in Eastern Europe London New Left BooksBurawoy Michael 1979 Manufacturing Consent Chicago University of Chicago Press

Giddens Anthony 1981 A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism BerkeleyUniversity of California Press

Gintis Herbert 1980 ldquoCommunication and Politics Marxism and the lsquoProblemrsquo ofLiberal Democracy ldquoSocialist Review 10 (2ndash3)189ndash232

Gramsci Antonio 1971 Selections From the Prison Notebooks New York InternationalPublishers

Hirst Paul 1976 ldquoAlthusser and the Theory of Ideologyrdquo Economy and Society5(4)385ndash412

Holloway John and Sol Picciotto (eds) 1978 State and Capital A Marxist DebateAustin University of Texas Press

Kiser Edgar V 1985 ldquoUtopian Literature and the Ideology of Monopoly CapitalismThe Case of Edward Bellamyrsquos Looking Backwardrdquo In Richard Braumgart (ed)Research in Political Sociology Volume 1 New York JAI Press

Kiser Edgar V and Kathryn A Baker 1984 ldquoFeminist Ideology and Utopian LiteraturerdquoQuarterly Journal of Ideology

Laclau Ernesto 1977a ldquoFascism and Ideologyrdquo In Politics and Ideology in MarxistTheory London New Left Books

mdashmdashmdash 1977b ldquoTowards a Theory of Populismrdquo In Politics and Ideology in MarxistTheory London New Left Books

Laclau Ernesto and Chantal MouVe 1982 ldquoRecasting Marxism Hegemony and NewPolitical Movementsrdquo Socialist Review 12(6) 91ndash113

Lenin Vladamir I 1943 ldquoThe Three Sources and Three Component Parts of MarxismrdquoIn Selected Works Vol XI New York International Publishers

mdashmdashmdash 1970 ldquoWhat Is To Be Donerdquo In Selected Works Vol I Moscow ProgressMacPherson CB 1961 The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism Oxford Oxford

University PressPoulantzas Nicos 1973 Political Power and Social Classes London New Left Booksmdashmdashmdash 1974 Fascism and Dictatorship London New Left Booksmdashmdashmdash 1980 State Power Socialism London New Left BooksTherborn Goran 1980 The Ideology of Power and the Power of Ideology London

New Left BooksThompson EP 1978 The Poverty of Theory and Other Essays New York Monthly

Review PressUrry John 1982 The Anatomy of Capitalist Societies London MacMillanWolfe Alan 1977 The Limits of Legitimacy New York Free Press



(1971128) He notes that for this to occur two separate conditions mustbe met (1) skills and knowledge required for speci c positions in thetechnical division of labor must be reproduced and (2) the submissionof laborers to the ldquorules of the established orderrdquo (1971127) must alsobe reproduced

The answer Althusser provides to this question is that the relationsof production are reproduced by ldquothe legal-political and ideologicalsuperstructurerdquo (1971141) He retains the basesuperstructure analogysince it allows him to represent the relative autonomy and reciprocaleVectivity of the three diVerent levels or instances in a social formation(economic political ideological)1 while maintaining the determinationin the last instance of the economic base Two components of Althusserrsquosessay have in uenced all subsequent Marxist discussion about ideology(1) his theory of the microstructure of ideology based on the ldquocreationof subjectsrdquo and (2) his analysis of the ldquoIdeological State Apparatusesrdquo(ISAs)2 Our emphasis is on the former though we will touch upon ISAsA full investigation of ISAs would require elaboration of Althusserrsquos the-ory of the state which is not our subject (and which we nd to be aproblematic concept)

Althusser begins his discussion of ideology by making a distinctionbetween ldquoideology in generalrdquo and ldquoparticular ideologiesrdquo (1971150)The study of particular ideologies is necessarily historical and thus can-not take place outside the context of concrete social formations Populistideologies for example have in diVerent times and places been associ-ated with fascism socialism and competitive capitalism According toAlthusser these particular ideologies always express class position regard-less of their form (1971150) Althusserrsquos project is to develop a theoryof ideology in general which he argues ldquohas no historyrdquo (1971151)Ideology in general is an omnihistorical reality de ned by its structureand function in the same manner as is Freudrsquos concept of the unconscious3

Ideology in general functions to reproduce the conditions of pro-duction4 This is done through interpellating subjects such that theycome to represent their real conditions of existence to themselves in animaginary form This form allows subjects to make sense of their par-ticular lived experiences by making existing social relations seem uni-versal timeless and natural (taken-for-granted) The object of ideologyis lived experience Althusser contrasts ideology with science whose objectis the structures and patterns of experiences Scienti c practice producestheoretical knowledge while ideological practice only provides ldquoknow-howrdquo that is practical knowledge and common sense















Poulantzas













Ideological Regions






















Therborn
























Laclau










Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References



































Poulantzas













Ideological Regions






















Therborn
























Laclau










Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References





























Poulantzas













Ideological Regions






















Therborn
























Laclau










Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References






















Poulantzas













Ideological Regions






















Therborn
























Laclau










Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References






























Ideological Regions






















Therborn
























Laclau










Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References

























Ideological Regions






















Therborn
























Laclau










Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References








































Therborn
























Laclau










Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References


































Therborn
























Laclau










Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References
























Therborn
























Laclau










Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References









































Laclau










Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References


































Laclau










Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References




























Laclau










Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References






















Laclau










Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References

























Urry






Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References
























Civil Society













Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References































Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References

























Discussion


Functionalism







Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References


























Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References






















Reductionism














Conclusion













Notes




















References




























Conclusion













Notes




















References
























Conclusion













Notes




















References






























Notes




















References























Notes




















References































References





































Documents

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN MARXIST THEORIES OF IDEOLOGY