by Peter Joyce
Marxists adopt a more precise definition of ideology. Here it refers to a coherent set of ideas, beliefs and values through which an individual can make sense of the social world they inhabit. This ought to derive from a person’s social class. However, Marxists contend that liberal democracies are dominated by the ideology of the ruling class (or bourgeoisie) which secures the acquiescence of the working class (proletariat) to exploitation and social inequality. The dominance accorded to bourgeois ideas in such societies (arising from the control they exert over agencies such as the education system and the media) results in the proletariat suffering from what Friedrich Engels referred to as a ‘false consciousness’ whereby they fail to appreciate the fact that they are exploited and thus consent to the operations of the existing social system, which is therefore accorded legitimacy by this intellectual form of control.
* * *
Insight
The term ‘political spectrum’ is used to place different political ideologies in relationship to one another, thereby enabling the similarities and differences that exist between them to be identified.
* * *
* * *
The political spectrum
The various political ideologies are grouped under the broad headings of ‘left’, ‘right’ and ‘centre’. The right consists of fascism and conservatism, the centre consists of liberalism and social democracy and the left comprises socialism, communism and anarchism. Anarchism is located on the far left of the political spectrum and fascism is on the far right. This terminology was derived from the French Revolution in the late eighteenth century: the left was associated with revolution while the right was identified with reaction.
The terms ‘right’, ‘left’ and ‘centre’ lack precise definition but are used broadly to indicate the stances which the different ideologies adopt towards political, economic and social change. Historically, the right opposed this, preferring tradition and the established order of the past. The left endorsed change as a necessary development which was designed to improve the human condition. The centre was also associated with change, but wished to introduce this gradually within the existing economic and political framework, which the left sought to abolish as a prerequisite to establishing an improved society.
The political spectrum is concerned with ideologies, not with the political systems or practices with which they may be associated. Communism and fascism (which are on the opposite ends of the political spectrum) are both associated with totalitarian political systems in which citizens are deprived of a wide range of civil and political liberties and in which personal freedom is sacrificed to the common interests which are defined by the state. However, the nature of the society with which these two ideologies are associated is entirely different.
* * *
Question
Explain what you understand by the term ‘political spectrum’.
Individualism and collectivism
* * *
Insight
Individualism and collectivism are fundamental principles which help to distinguish different political ideologies.
* * *
Individualism places the interests of individual citizens at the forefront of its concerns and is the opposite of collectivism. As a political doctrine individualism suggests that the sphere of government should be limited so as not unduly to encroach on the ability of individuals to pursue their own interests and thereby achieve self-fulfilment. As an economic principle, it opposes government intervention in the workings of the economy, preferring support for the free market and laissez-faire capitalism (which sees no place for government imposing restrictions affecting matters such as wages and conditions of work). Individualism is a core value of American society.
Individualism is historically linked to liberalism, where the classical notion of limited government (derived from natural rights) held that individuals should be as free as possible from state interference since this would deprive them of their ability to exercise responsibility for the conduct of their lives. It could, however, be justified in order to prevent actions by some which would impede the ability of others to advance their interests. This belief would, for example, justify legislation against monopolists since these prejudiced the position of individual entrepreneurs. By the same token, state involvement in social policy (especially to protect the poorer and weaker members of society) was rejected by liberals for much of the nineteenth century on the grounds that individuals should be responsible for their own welfare.
Individualism was thus historically viewed as the opposite of collectivism. However, some strands of liberal thought have suggested their compatibility by arguing that individual enterprise is hindered by circumstances such as the operations of the economy which are not of the individual’s own making. State action directed at those who are placed in such circumstances can thus be justified in the belief that it would remove impediments preventing people from being able to assert control over their own destinies.
The ‘new right’ enthusiastically adopted many of the ideas associated with classical liberalism in the 1980s, in particular support for the free market and opposition to social welfare policies. In America individualism underpins the opposition voiced by militia movements against government involvement in people’s lives.
Collectivism entails the sacrifice of self-interest to commonly agreed goals. These are often asserted by a central political authority which results in the state taking an active role, directing the resources at its command to achieve these objectives.
Collectivism is usually depicted as the opposite of individualism since group needs are placed above the pursuit of individual interests. However, some aspects of liberal thought argue that these ideas are not incompatible since the sense of co-operation and fraternity which is developed through collective endeavour enables individuals to develop their personalities to a greater extent than would be possible if they existed in isolation.
Collectivism emerged in the United Kingdom towards the end of the nineteenth century when various socialist organizations advocated a more vigorous response by the state to social problems, especially poverty, which would entail an enhanced level of government intervention in the economy and some redistribution of resources from the more affluent members of society. Some within the Liberal Party (the ‘new Liberals’) also moved towards advocating activity by both central and local government to improve social conditions. This resulted in legislation in the early twentieth century to benefit the poorer and weaker members of society, which ultimately developed into the Welfare State.
Collectivism is traditionally closely identified with socialism, especially with those who view state ownership of the means of production (achieved through policies such as nationalization) as the way to achieve a more just society. However, collective action can be organized through social units other than the state (such as communities that possess a wide degree of political autonomy) and may underpin economic ventures such as co-operatives in which people can work together and pursue common aims within a capitalist economic system.
Question
Outline the key differences between the terms ‘individualism’ and ‘collectivism’.
Left-wing political ideologies
* * *
Insight
The left of the political spectrum embraces a wide range of political ideologies including anarchism, communism and socialism. All seek to promote fundamental social change based upon the redistribution of wealth and resources, which typically entails the destruction of the existing social order.
* * *
A number of political ideologies are identified with the left of the political spectrum. These seek the destruction of capitalism and the establishment of a new social order based upon a fundamental redistribution of wealth, resources and power.
ANARCHISM
Anarchism literally means ‘no rule’ and is a form of socialism which rejects conventional forms of government on the basis that they i
mpose restraints on individuals without their express consent having been given. Accordingly, anarchists urge the abolition of the state and all forms of political authority, especially the machinery of law and order (which they view as the basis of oppression, providing for the exercise of power by some members of society over others). Most anarchists deem violence as the necessary means to tear down the state.
Anarchists assert that government is an unnecessary evil since social order will develop naturally. Co-operation will be founded upon the self-interest of individuals and regulated by their common sense and willingness to resolve problems rationally. They assert that traditional forms of government, far from promoting harmony, are the root cause of social conflict. Private ownership of property, which is a key aspect of capitalist society, is regarded as a major source of this friction.
Some aspects of Marxism (especially the view that under communism the state would ‘wither away’) are compatible with anarchist views. Anarchist thought has been concerned with developing social structures outside conventional forms of government in the belief that the elimination of the state would eradicate exploitation and that co-operation, fraternity and a fair division of goods and labour would be facilitated in smaller forms of social organization. These have included syndicalism (which sought worker control of industry to be achieved by strike action), communes and a wide range of co-operative endeavours (which were characterized by relatively small groups of individuals owning and operating a productive enterprise which is managed for their mutual economic benefit).
COMMUNISM
Communism (sometimes referred to as socialist democracy) is a political system based on the ideas of Karl Marx. According to Marxist theory, communism occurs following the overthrow of capitalism and after an intermediary phase (referred to as socialism) in which the Communist Party functions as the vanguard of the proletariat, ruling on their behalf and paving the way for the eventual establishment of communism. This is characterized by the abolition of private property and class divisions and the creation of equality in which citizens live in co-operation and harmony. In this situation the state becomes unnecessary and will ‘wither away’.
States which have called themselves ‘communist’ have not achieved the ideal situation referred to by Marx. Considerable differences existed between them (especially the former USSR and China, whose approach to issues such as social equality was dissimilar) although in general, these countries were characterized by the existence of little or no private property ownership, a planned economy (which was viewed as essential to achieving equality and classlessness) and a comprehensive welfare state.
The most notable feature of communist states is the paramount position of an official socialist ideology and the domination or total monopolization of political affairs by the official Communist Party. As the massacre of opponents to the communist regime in China at Tiananmen Square in 1989 evidenced, dissent is not encouraged in communist states. The control which the Communist Party exerts over government means that the judiciary is less able to defend civil and political liberties than is the case in liberal democratic political systems.
Communist states included the former Soviet Union and its East European satellite neighbours but, following the ‘collapse of communism’ in Eastern Europe between 1989–91, communism is now confined to a smaller number of countries which include the People’s Republic of China, Vietnam, Cuba and North Korea. The communist heritage of the former states has resulted in weak party systems and limited levels of public participation in political affairs. Civil liberties are relatively poorly protected. A considerable degree of state ownership remains, although vigorous attempts are being made to move towards a capitalist economy.
* * *
Marxism–Leninism
Marxism–Leninism combines the ideas of Karl Marx and Vladimir Ilych Lenin. Marx asserted that actions and human institutions were economically determined and that the class struggle was the key instrument of historical change. Lenin was especially concerned with the organization of a post-capitalist society. Marxism–Leninism formed the basis of the political system which was established in Russia following the 1917 Revolution.
Marxist theory, like elitism, questioned the pluralist nature of society. It held that in industrialized societies the elite consisted of the economically dominant class, the bourgeoisie. Their wealth was the underpinning for their political power, in which the state was used as an instrument to dominate and exploit the working class (or proletariat). Although those who owned and controlled capital were not necessarily the same as those who exercised political power, the economic interests and cultural values of the former determined the actions undertaken by the latter. Popular consent to such decisions is especially reliant on the ideological control exerted over the population by this economically powerful elite.
Marx stressed that social classes were in an inevitable state of competition with one another and that the exploitive nature of capitalism made a proletarian or working-class revolution inevitable. Exploitation would result in increased class consciousness. This would develop into class conflict, resulting in a revolution involving the overthrow of the ruling class and the emergence of a new society based on what he termed ‘the dictatorship of the proletariat’. The new socialist society would be characterized by the abolition of private property ownership, which was viewed as the basis of the inequalities of the class system.
Marx said little concerning how a socialist society should be organized. This was a major concern of Lenin’s. He argued that it was the role of the Communist Party to act as the vanguard (that is, leader) of the proletariat which would direct the revolution and control society while true socialism was being constructed. A key objective of this period would be to rescue the masses from the false consciousness which had been cultivated by the previous regime. This meant that a one-party state operated in countries controlled by Marxist–Leninist ideology.
Most Eastern European communist parties subscribed to Marxist–Leninist doctrines. These were, however, challenged elsewhere. Maoism, named after the Chinese leader Mao Tse-Tung, viewed the peasantry rather than the industrial proletariat as the revolutionary class and, in common with Leon Trotsky, he also rejected the centralized power exerted by the Communist Party in favour of the popular involvement of the masses in the revolutionary transformation of society.
* * *
SOCIALISM
Socialism arose in reaction to the exploitive nature of capitalism. It rejects a society in which inequalities in the distribution of wealth and political power result in social injustice and is committed to the ideal of equality. Socialists seek a society in which co-operation and fraternity replace the divisions based on class lines which characterize capitalist societies. There is, however, considerable disagreement concerning both the nature of an egalitarian society and how it would be created. These stem from the diverse traditions embraced by socialism.
The roots of socialism include the economic theories of David Ricardo (who suggested that the interests of capital and labour were opposed), the reforming activities of Robert Owen (who advocated the ownership of the means of production by small groups of producers organized into societies based upon the spirit of co-operation), the Christian impulse (which was relevant to socialism through its concern for the poor and the early experiences of Christians living in a society in which property was held in common) and the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels who asserted that inequality was rooted in private property ownership and the class system which derived from this.
The varied impulses which influenced socialism explain the differences within it. A key division is between fundamentalist and reformist socialism (or social democracy). Fundamentalist socialists believe that state control of all means of production is indispensable to the creation of an egalitarian society and is thus viewed as their main political objective. They reject the free market and instead have historically endorsed the centralized planning of the econo
my and the nationalization (or ‘socialization’ as it is termed in America) of key industries to achieve this goal. Reformist (or revisionist) socialists, however, believe that an egalitarian society can be created by reforming the capitalist system rather than abolishing it. This version of socialism is commonly referred to as social democracy. This has resulted in nationalization being applied to selected industries on a piecemeal basis and an acceptance of the co-existence of state-owned and privately owned industry within what is termed a mixed economy. Central economic planning has typically been used to supplement the workings of the free market rather than seeking to replace it.
FEMINISM
Feminism is not a coherent political ideology. However, the desire of some aspects of feminist thinking to fundamentally change the power relationships in society makes it compatible with ideologies on the left of the political spectrum.
Feminism refers to a wide range of theories which assert that the power relationship between the sexes is unequal and which view this problem as a social construction rather than a natural situation arising from biological differences between male and females. Feminist ideas inspired campaigns waged from the late nineteenth century onwards seeking equal legal and political rights for women, but the modern feminist movement derived from North America in the 1960s.