Ideology

There are certain ideologies which need to be discussion


Conservatism
Liberalism
Socialism
The End of Ideology


Conservatism
Traditional Conservatism
British Conservatism
New Right (ideological conservatism?)
Neo Liberalism
Neo Conservatism


Traditional Conservatism
Traditional conservatism is firmly opposed to rationalism within politics and favours a sceptical pragmatic approach
Tradition, History, Experience are all firm dispositions of the conservatives
It is inherent and natural and a disposition about society rather than an ideological belief
Intimations of experience is what guides conservative thought, as evidence by their commitment toward an organic constitution which does not render history void and bring in rationalist positive values.
Conservatism is entrenched not in positive values to promote (like traditional ideologies) but about negative terms – as evidenced in On Human Conduct
Traditional conservatives value equality, family, property etc.
Are these not merely ideological viewpoints rather than dispositions?
However, these are the values gained from the intimations of experience of the past ages.
This view of conservatism is generally opposed to change.


British Conservatism
Compassionate conservatism
Presupposes the gap between rich and poor
Duty to bring about some equality
Didn’t let the weakest go to the well
Progressive Conservatism
Moving forward with a big leap forward showing them not opposed to change
Reform Act for Vote
Devolution
Council Houses
Second Reform Act


New Right
This is definitely an ideological viewpoint
Minimal State
Individualism
Tends to be socially authoritarian (as in Thatcher era)
THESE ARE RATIONALIST POSITIONS
Is this really conservatism or merely a form of classical liberalism?


Neo Conservatism
This is partly rational
Neo-Liberal Economics (RATIONALIST)
Traditional values – family religion (in a similar way to traditional conservatism)
Liberal Imperialism (RATIONALIST)


Is conservatism an ideology – depends which strand of conservatism you mean. We may not ‘know where we have come from or where we are going’ but surely someone must look after the boat? Perhaps all forms are ideological?




Is conservatism merely opposition to change – again, this depends on which strand of conservatism you mean. Although, I would be tempted to say that even traditional conservative though accepts some change that fall in line with the intimations of history.




LIBERALISM
Might be considered a contested concept


KEY ELEMENTS AGREED BY ALL LIBERALS


INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
Not necessarily entrenched
Claimed from the state and society
EQUALITY OF RIGHTS
Society as an aggregation of individual rights
CONSTITUIONAL CHECKS
Limited government
Tends to lead to liberal democracy
RELGIOUS TOLERATION
The state may be secular
RATIONALIST
Either original position or outcome based


Added to those fundamentals come two distinct strands of liberalism;




Neo Classical
Minimal State
Lassiez faire economy (maximises individual freedom)
Individuality
Anti Imperalist


Social Liberalism
Freedom needs social improvements
May call for a more maximising state to ensure these


SOCIALISM
Scientific
Utopian
Social democracy
Third Way


Scientific (Communism / Marxism)
Scientific socialism is the viewpoint of a communist and the viewpoint established by Karl Marx. It’s fundamental aim is the classless society


Economic determinism
Economics determines the general character socially and politically
Historical Materialism
Economic Base (techniques and methods of production which form relations between individuals)
DETERMINES
Superstructure (Institutions and forms of consciousness)
The end of history will occur when economic determinism stops and we end with the classless society
The public power that will exist will lose its political character. Can you have public power with coercion?
The law of surplus value, and to stop the economic base from existing in conflict meant Marx advocated a planned economy


Neo-Marxism
HUMANISTIC ASPECT (man as a human being
ACTION – PRAXIS
Historical change cannot happen through a scientific process but through the collective action. Neo Marxism focuses on human action.
Capitalism dehumanised the individual and social praxis is required to bring about the revolution of the proletariat.


Utopian
This is essentially looking for a classless society but not through any scientific process but by promoting it on moral/subjective grounds that it was ethical. Often the only way these utopian socialist communities arose was when people went off specifically to form one. Empirical studies showed they generally failed.




Social Democracy
Revision was a fundamentalist viewpoint to work within the system to gain power by the ballot box and then to achieve the classless society.
However, as you enter the system your goals changed and thus it developed into what is commonly known as social democracy


Social democracy is using capitalism for the common good. It has a few key features;


MIXED ECONOMY
State ownership of certain industries (usually coal etc.)
WELFARE STATE
Large and usually generous
REDISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE
Focus on bring about some equality of outcome.


What all these forms of socialism have in common is that they view society as one for the common good rather than any individualist conception. They focus much more on more ‘positive liberties’ and ‘equality of outcome’ and working towards a common goal. It is my personal opinion that it is a mistake to think there is any common good – merely an aggregation of numerous different interests to a deduce a common good is not to realise there is no single dominant will in society.




Third Way Social-ism – Blair
Socialism in the form of top-down intervention is dead. This ideology accepts capitalism and globalisation that breeds a knowledge economy of individual skill and flexibility
Government has an economic and social role
Economic – Promotion of international competitiveness etc
Social – contain pressure due to capitalism. A form of liberal communitarism
It is a forge between rights and entrepreneurialism and social/moral duty on the other. INTERDEPENDENT
Equality of opportunity / meritocracy – ‘hand up, not hand out’


Is it incoherent to accept the notion of economic liberalism and then warn against the social disintegration it causes?




Does communitarianism not just lead to ‘creeping authoritarianism?’




The End of ideology?
Daniel Bell
Ideology has become irrelevant within the modern world. Parties no longer face each other from differing ideological viewpoints but instead they promise higher living standards and economic growth – economics had triumphed over politics. This can be seen in the UK in the 1950-60’s with the broad consensus on Keynesian welfarism. This can also been seen in the UK with the consensus on economically liberal policies which both conservatives and labour offer.


Francis Fukayama
Liberal democracy has become the final resting ideology of the world. His book ‘the end of history’ was written in the time when Marxism was slowly disintegrating within Eastern Europe and Liberal Democracy was the dominant force in the world.
It is the end of history in the sense that history is no longer going to be driven by ideological changes as one has triumphed. Although we may have some remnants of other ideologies history has come to a stasis while Liberal Democracy triumphs.
It is the end of man’s ideological evolution.
No furthering development in principles / institutions
How do we know Liberal Democracy will not fail?
Similar utopian ideals have been left in the ashes of history – Marxism
Liberal imperialism is still taking place
Liberal Democracy is still an ideology – so ideology has not ended. Considering liberal democracies ensure the right to free speech, it is impossible to ever end the ideology debate within a Liberal Democracy.
[edit]Anthony Giddens
The conventional ideologies of left and right have become redundant within a society that is characterised by globalisation, decline of tradition and social reflexivity (autonomy mixed with interdependence).


Read more...