Thesis-1975D-F853s.Pdf

SOCIOLOGICAL FORMULATIONS OF ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES By ALEX SAMUEL FREEDMAN \I Bachelor of Arts Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, Louisiana 1948 Master of Arts Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, Louisiana 1950 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY July, 1975 GJ Copyright By Alex Samuel Freedman 1975 O:<LAHOMA STATE Ur·~iVfa~SITY SOCIOLOGICAL FORMULATIONS OF ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES Thesis Approved: Dean of the Graduate College 938H3i. ii PREFACE The study of ideology is hardly a science; thus, it is difficult to implement standardized methodological procedures in its analysis. It becomes necessary, therefore, to utilize an optional approach, sociology as an art form, in gaining proper insights into the signifi cance of ideology as it is manifested in society via values and influ ences in regards to how persons act out their lives. The assumption which is made here is that when C. Wright Mills described the "socio logical imagination," he was referring to individuals acting as whole persons aware of ideological constraint. A selection of literature dealing with ideology and the sociology of knowledge is critically reviewed for purposes of gaining a general understanding of the concept. This literature, not exhaustive because of time and space considerations, is designed to introduce the main stream contributions of Marx, Mannheim, Sorokin and others to the controversial nature of ideology. Issues such as "New Left," "Radical Sociology" and the "End of Ideology" controversy are reviewed for their impact on the concept. In a general sense, ideology is viewed here as an "antecedent" variable or one which must be given first consideration in any sociological analysis. Notation is made that despite the scholastic works of Mannheim and others, many writers in sociology use ideology as a catchall mystique term whjch is devoid of meaning. In this respect, ideology shares a iii corrunon fate with other concepts such as "attitude," "culture," "society" and "corrununity." Stress has been placed on economic and political ideologies or the "prime movers" for most societies. In brief, this is a theoretical dissertation which attempts to evaluate constituent variables and ideas associated with the concept ideology. It does not purport to be a final statement on the subject but more a relative approximation of our present knowledge based on the best evidence available. In essence, this study attempts to take ideology out of the dark corridors of the mind and to expose it to the bright sunlight for what it actua+ly means to individuals, groups and societies. The ongoing question which this dissertation attempts to resolve is formulated in the following way: What is this concept--ideology--that has the capacity to be "all" or "nothing," "truth" or "distqrtion," "driving force" or "deterrent" all rolled up into one "entity" or "package deal" as corporate symbolism would have it? The writer wishes to extend his deep gratitude to Dr. Ivan Chapman, dissertation adviser, who gave so much of his time in behalf of this theoretical project. Hearty thanks are due also to other members of the committee: Dr. Jack E. Bynum, Dr. Donald A. Tennant and Dr. Kenneth St. Clair. The writer wishes to dedicate this dissertation to his lovely wife, Barbara, who has worked so many long hours typing and proofreading the manuscript. A word of acknowledgment is due also to Mr. and Mrs. Paul Britt of Stamps, Arkansas, who have made their charming home my favorite "study" for the past few years. Support for this dissertation was provided by Henderson State University, Arkadelphia, Arkansas, which provided the writer with a iv one year's leave of absence including a study grant. Additional support was provided by the Department of Sociology, Oklahoma State University, which provided the writer with an appointment as instructor part-time during school year 1974-1975. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 20 III. A CRITIQUE OF MANNHEIM . 45 IV. MAINSTREAM MATERIALS • 53 v. THE END OF IDEOLOGY DEBATE • 72 VI. RADICAL SOCIOLOGY AS IDEOLOGY 91 VII. ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES 102 VIII. A NEW MODEL FOR IDEOLOGY • 140 IX. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 158 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY • • . • . 174 vi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The concept of "ideology" shares many common characteristics with that of "social class." Both terms are extremely important to sociology and to the social sciences and yet both terms share equally in their ambiguities and proneness to emotional involvement. Richard Centers comments on the latter concept: . social class identification is not now a para mount aspect of the thinking of most Americans; class is not a salient and vital aspect of their sense of identity.l Another social class example is that explained by Albert K. Cohen and Harold M. Hodges, Jr. who describe a "lower-blue-collar" social class as being a conglomeration of such characteristics as "extra punitiveness," "simplification of the experience world," "powerless- ness," "deprivation" and "insecurity," "anti-intellectualism," and "authoritarianism." A closer look at this cluster of variables is interpreted via role playing: .•. role relationships are more likely for the (lbc)* to be defined in terms of somebody responsible for making decisions and giving orders, and somebody respon sible for carrying them out • • • the decisive question in "real life" situation is • "Who's boss?"2 The ideological position appears to be even more elusive than that of the "social class" position in that there is less empirical relevance *lower-blue-collar 1 2 for its support and justification. This problem is touched on by Ernst Cassirer who has written: . what became more important for the general history of ideas and for the development of philosophical thought was not the empirical facts of evolution but the theoreti cal interpretation of these facts.3 There are, perhaps, some observers of our society who believe that American Sociology is the rough equivalent of the British Fabian Society; they would be in for a disappointment of major proportions. If any one term depicts the essential ideological posture and orienta- tion of American Sociology, it would be non-political subsumed under a complex web of terminology complimentary to what is sometimes ref erred to as the "establishment syndrome," or "liberal capitalism," or a crude rationale of "laissez faire," "captain of industry" mythology centering around anti-collectivism or extreme individualism. This amorphous conservatism is no accident; it has many antecedents which may easily be detected. Among the highlights of the conservative matrix which has been modern sociology's heritage are the combined happenings in response to the French Revolution. Society is an organic entity and is prior to the individual. Society is not reducible to individuals. Each individual and each social trait are parts of a system which is maintained by needs. Next is the significance of function in society in which the small group is the basic unit of society. The recognition of social disorganization is viewed in opposition to the sacred values of the society. Last, the legitimation of authority is manifested in a chain 4 which links family, community, class and society together. 3 A point of some confusion is when "social class'' and "ideology" are compounded into a more general concept than that discussed above. One finds some comfort in going along with the generality engendered by the following question and accompanying answer: Why and how do the oppressed and the exploited chal lenge those who dog it and hog it? Since man's invention of private property and the state, a small minority of persons have declared their commitment to coerce a majority and to justify minority use of force in the name of a common good.5 However, "social class" and "ideology" are combined in the conservative manifesto as depicted above by Nisbet. This being the case one can see the extreme conservative side of traditional American Sociology where, in some respects,it is still fashionable to refer to "organic society" (if not "organic solidarity") and where "social disorganization" (more likely, "deviance") may be referred to from the point of view of "structural defects" (let alone such declarations as "anomie" or "labeling theory") and where "social system" becomes the model for everything that can be socially reified. Last, in this context, the position of authority remains paramount despite an erosion and corrup- tion on the part of politicans and their parties. One may seek and find ideological explanations for all components of the above system. More specifically, the conceptualization needed at this juncture is stated by John c. Leggett as follows: . • • we do make a distinction between ideology and utopia, between, in effect, obfuscation and hope. States depend on ideologies to foster legitimation, but political movements--especially the more militant variety--espouse utopias. Ideologies refer to idea systems that purport to portray reality, although gen erally they obscure it. Ideologies may be specific or qen< 't"a 1. 6 4 A more delicate if not sophisticated aspect of this critical phenomenon is viewed by David Braybrooke who states: Ideology constitutes a predicament more insidious than the universal liability of mankind to personal prejudice. Social scientists can correct each

Load more