Review of Last Class:
A. Ideology presents a system of ideas and ideals that form the basis of how one group or social
class thinks.
B. Ideology refers to politically and socially shared beliefs among groups. It presents a world view
that under some circumstances attains such power that it becomes an objectified worldview.
C. Ideologies contain ideas and ideals from a number of sources. Usually, there is no one ideology;
there are ideologies that form a patchwork of societal views.
D. Both religion and the corporate community infiltrate the sphere of political ideology. In certain
regions of America today religious doctrines are so foundational to the ideals of political
ideology that it becomes impossible to separate church and state. Likewise, the corporate
community has taken charge of political ideology in order to maintain economic ideals that prop
up the interests of big business and the profit motive.
E. Every social formation must reproduce the conditions of production at the same time as it
produces the object it is manufacturing. We could talk about a manufacturer building an object
(an ipad or a Jetta), but we are not. Here we are talking about ideology championing certain
ideas that cohere into a social formation. Here we are talking about an ideology perpetuating
itself in a social formation (Christianity, Communist, Feminist, etc.) Here ideology champions a
way of thinking that takes form in society in a system of ideas that perpetuates itself. That is the
terrain we are traversing. The capitalist who manufactures Volkswagens must produce the Jetta
as well as the social formation (giving form to an idea as it becomes tangible and therefore
concrete, second nature, commonsensical).
F. The ultimate condition of production is therefore the reproduction of the conditions of
production. A social formation is the form given to a way of thinking
Herman Rapaport, “Ideology”
1. [Billy Daophaouthenh and Amy Glidden] Top-Down Ideology: Top-down ideology refers to the
approach to ideology by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels who argued that the ideas of the ruling class are
the ideas that rule society. In their view, the very class that owns and rules the modes of industrial
production (the base) also rules the modes of intellectual conception and its institutionalization (the
superstructure).
2. [Kira Farrell and Carina Duffy] Top-Down Ideology: As an organized, coherent account of reality,
ideology functions as a system of social control that is based on typifying phenomena (events, people,
situations, motivations) in such a way that everyday life becomes instantly recognizable in terms of what
is normal and what is unusual. In taking certain typifications for granted, what may be an entirely
ideological construction is accepted as usual and even natural. What is a typification? It is a typical,
commonsense, naturalized way of looking at life. They produce so-called “natural facts,” facts of life
that appear to be what they are. That is the sticking point. Facts are the product of cultural production.
Facts are produced by a certain way of viewing life, a certain way of examining our experience, of
organizing our perceptions. Natural facts don’t exist. Natural facts are not natural; they are culturally
produced.
3. [Josh Estrella] Top-Down Ideology: Often, typifications are objectifications of value, which means that
typifications are based upon not only value differences, but upon a preference or bias for some values
over others. To take an obvious example, in terms of typifying masculinity versus femininity a large
number of value differences are at issue, and what characterizes a so-called proper man or a proper
woman, in the eyes of society, depends upon value biases that over time are objectified, taken for
granted, and then treated as if they were natural. Westerners notice this quite strikingly in comparing
Western to non-Western norms.
4. [Jessica Miller] Top-Down Ideology: A problem with the concept of top-down ideology (the feminist
concept of patriarchy is a variant of it) is that ruling elites actually do not have a monopoly upon
ideology. If they did, everyone would take the monopoly version of reality at face value and never
question it. Ruling elites may promote an official ideology of the state, but there is a long history that
shows how ruling ideologies have been satirized and mocked by much of the society to whom this
ideology was directed. While examining the writings of Francois Rabelais, Mikhail Bakhtin argued that
for Rabelais "it is necessary to destroy and rebuild the entire false picture of the world, to sunder the
false hierarchical links between objects and ideas, to abolish the divisive ideational strata ... Thus, in
Rabelais the destruction of the old picture of the world and the positive construction of a new picture
are indissolubly inter-woven with each other."'
5. [Jordan LaRose and Taylor Lundy] Top-Down Ideology: During the Vietnam war, ordinary Americans
began to question the top-down ideology of the US government with respect to justifying the invasion
of a poor country in South East Asia in the throes of civil war. Entertainers, in particular, began to parody
government officials and their speeches, offering lines like, "Be the first one on your block to send your
son home in a box." The war provided an opportunity by top-down ideology for the public to objectify,
critique, and demonstrate against a world picture as constructed by political and military elites fighting a
so-called "cold war" with communism. Once a large segment of the public could objectify the illogicality,
paranoia, and futility of holding to such a world picture, especially given the sacrifice the government
was expecting American families to make, it was possible to delegitimize the top-down ideology and
offer alternative ways of thinking about society, culture, and politics.
Louis Althusser, “Ideology and ideological State Apparatuses” (134-141)
6. [Gabriel Morrison] Infrastructure and Superstructure: Every social structure is comprised for Marx of
two levels: the infrastructure, or economic base (the productive forces of production) and the
superstructure, which is comprised of the politico-legal (law and the State) and ideology (the different
ideologies, religious, ethical, legal, political, etc.). He uses the metaphor of the house with its basement
and its two upper floors. The political and legal apparatus and the ideological apparatus exists to
support, in Marx’s model, the economic baseline. More specifically, he says that while the
superstructure has some degree of autonomy, it still enters into a reciprocal action with the base. For
Marx, because he was a Marxist!, the base in the last instance determines the whole edifice. That said,
Althusser wants to examine the nature of the superstructure, especially the ideological aspect of it.
7. [Christina Machado and Christopher Mowner] The State: In the Marxist tradition the State is explicitly
conceived as a repressive apparatus, a 'machine' of repression, which enables the ruling classes to
ensure their domination over the working class. The State is part of the Superstructure discussed above
(the politico-legal part) and Althusser calls it the repressive State apparatus. The requirements of its
legal practice include the police, the courts, the prisons, and the army. All of these can use brute force
to defend the interests of the ruling classes' in the class struggle conducted by the bourgeoisie and
its allies against the proletariat.
8. [Karen Ramirez] From Descriptive Theory to Theory as Such: To review: Marx uses a topological
metaphor of the house or edifice (in which the infrastructure and superstructure are still partly
descriptive). Being descriptive is the first phase of analysis, says Althusser, but we must go beyond it
because the term theory 'clashes' to some extent with the adjective 'descriptive'. Thus, the definition of
the State as a class State, existing in the repressive State apparatus, casts a brilliant light on all the facts
observable in the various orders of repression whatever their domains: from the massacres of June
1848 and of the Paris Commune, of Bloody Sunday, May 1905 in Petrograd, etc. This seems obvious in
the sense that we say “that’s how it is, that’s really true!” This obviousness is a blockage to Althusser,
for what seems true on the descriptive level blocks another level of analysis. We must add something
to the classical definition of the State as a State apparatus, he argues.
9. [Daury Rodriquez] The Essentials of the Marxist Theory of the State: Althusser summarizes the
Marxist point of view: (1) the State is the repressive State apparatus, (2) State power and State
apparatus must be distinguished, (3) the objective of the class struggle concerns State power . . . and
(4) the proletariat must seize State power in order to destroy the existing bourgeois State apparatus.
But it seems to me that even with this supplement, this theory is still in part descriptive, although it
does now contain complex and differential elements whose functioning and action cannot be
understood without recourse to further supplementary theoretical development.
Donald Hall, “Marxist and Materialist Analysis”
10. [Juan Silliezar and Gerard Tetreault] Overview: While the international currency of Marxism as a
rigidly defined political movement has waned in recent years, Marxist-influenced analysis of literature is
still practiced widely, both as a distinct methodology and in combination with methodologies
emphasizing issues of gender, sexuality, and/or race. Marxist and materialist analysis is rooted in
historical research and changing social contexts for understanding literary and other cultural texts. Yet
at the same time, wide differences of opinion exist about the application of Marxist and materialist
theories. Methodological purists would insist that any deviation from Marx’s specific theories of class
and cultural production represents a corruption of the only tool that we have to effect profound social
change. Other critics, however, would suggest that attention to material conditions (those of economic
situation and historical circumstances) and ideology (the belief systems accounting for and justifying
those conditions) can augment almost any reading and that Marxist theories represent one important
tool among many that allow insight into the complex workings of culture and the diverse uses and
meanings of texts.
11. [Jessica Souza] Overview: According to Marx, society is stratified into three primary classes-the
aristocracy, the bourgeoisie, and the proletariat-each with a different worldview and set of interests.
The aristocracy is the traditional class of nobles, those individuals who for many centuries held extraordinary power over others and enjoyed equally extraordinary privileges because of their ownership of
land, their control of political structures ranging from kingships to local feudal positions, and their
proprietorship over the bodies and labor of their subjects. The members of this class are very few in
number, and both their political and economic power has diminished considerably as the Western world
has moved to post-feudal forms of social organization. In the past three centuries, far greater
socioeconomic power has accrued to the bourgeoisie, those individuals who have accumulated wealth
and influence through their control of factories, businesses, and other highly profitable enterprises. Yet
oppression has by no means diminished with this change, because under capitalism the competitive
economic system emphasizing self-motivated acquisition-the bourgeoisie have continued the
aristocratic tradition of exploiting the labor of others and ensuring their own wealth through practically
every means possible. Those whom they exploit, but also depend on, are the proletariat, the working
class, who sell their labor and bodies but control none of the institutions or structures that generate the
great wealth of the bourgeoisie.