WEEK 5: POLITICAL

Introductio
ID E OLOGIE S

n to
Political H A M D U L L A H B AYC A R

Science KARADENIZ TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

Ideology
• An ideology is a set of beliefs or philosophies attributed to a person or group
of persons, especially those held for reasons that are not purely epistemic, in
which "practical elements are as prominent as theoretical ones".
• Formerly applied primarily to economic, political, or religious theories and
policies, in a tradition going back to Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, more
recent use treats the term as mainly condemnatory.
Political Ideology
• A political ideology is a set of ideas, beliefs, values, and opinions, exhibiting a
recurring pattern, that competes deliberately as well as unintentionally over
providing plans of action for public policy making in an attempt to justify,
explain, contest, or change the social and political arrangements and
processes of a political community.
political ideology
• In political science, a political ideology is a certain set of ethical ideals,
principles, doctrines, myths or symbols of a social movement, institution,
class or large group that explains how society should work and offers some
political and cultural blueprint for a certain social order.
Political ideology
Political ideology
• A political ideology largely concerns itself with how to allocate power and to
what ends it should be used. Some political parties follow a certain ideology
very closely while others may take broad inspiration from a group of related
ideologies without specifically embracing any one of them. An ideology's
popularity is partly due to the influence of moral entrepreneurs, who
sometimes act in their own interests. Political ideologies have two
dimensions: (1) goals: how society should be organized; and (2) methods: the
most appropriate way to achieve this goal.
Ideas and ideology
• An ideology is a collection of ideas. Typically, each ideology contains certain
ideas on what it considers to be the best form of government (e.g. autocracy
or democracy) and the best economic system (e.g. capitalism or socialism).
The same word is sometimes used to identify both an ideology and one of its
main ideas. For instance, socialism may refer to an economic system, or it
may refer to an ideology that supports that economic system. The same term
may also refer to multiple ideologies, which is why political scientists try to
find consensus definitions for these terms. For example, while the terms have
been conflated at times, communism has come in common parlance and in
academics to refer to Soviet-type regimes and Marxist–Leninist ideologies,
whereas socialism has come to refer to a wider range of differing ideologies
which are most often distinct from Marxism–Leninism.
Political Ideology
Does political ideologies matter?
• to study ‘ideologies’ is to be concerned with analysing the content of political thought, to be interested in
the ideas, doctrines and theories that have been advanced by and within the various ideological traditions.
• For example,
• what can liberalism tell us about freedom?
• Why have socialists traditionally supported equality?
• How do anarchists defend the idea of a stateless society?
• Why have fascists regarded struggle and war as healthy?
• In order to examine such ‘content’ issues, however, it is necessary to consider the overarching ‘type’ of
political thought we are dealing with. Before discussing the characteristic ideas and doctrines of the so-
called ideologies, we need to reflect on why these sets of ideas have been categorized as ideologies. More
importantly, what does the categorization tell us? What can we learn about, for instance, liberalism,
socialism, feminism and fascism from the fact that they are classified as ideologies?
Why defining political ideology is
hard?
• The first problem confronting any discussion of the nature of ideology is that there is no settled or
agreed definition of the term, only a collection of rival definitions. As David McLellan (1995)
commented, ‘Ideology is the most elusive concept in the whole of the social sciences.’ Few political
terms have been the subject of such deep and impassioned controversy.
• This has occurred for two reasons. In the first place, as all concepts of ideology acknowledge a link
between theory and practice, the term uncovers highly contentious debates about the role of ideas in
politics and the relationship between beliefs and theories on the one hand, and material life or political
conduct on the other. Second, the concept of ideology has not been able to stand apart from the
ongoing struggle between and among political ideologies.
• For much of its history, the term ‘ideology’ has been used as a political weapon, a device with which to
condemn or criticize rival sets of ideas or belief systems. Not until the second half of the twentieth
century was a neutral and apparently objective concept of ideology widely employed, and even then
disagreements persisted over the social role and political significance of ideology.
Among the meanings that have been attached
to ideology are the following:
• - a political belief system
• n action-orientated set of political ideas
• the ideas of the ruling class
• the world-view of a particular social class or social group
• political ideas that embody or articulate class or social interests
• ideas that propagate false consciousness among the exploited or oppressed
• ideas that situate the individual within a social context and generate a sense of collective belonging
• an officially sanctioned set of ideas used to legitimize a political system or regime
• an all-embracing political doctrine that claims a monopoly of truth
• an abstract and highly systematic set of political ideas.
Ideology as a science of ideas
• The origins of the term are nevertheless clear. The word ‘ideology’ was coined
during the French Revolution by Antoine Destutt de Tracy (1754–1836), and
was first used in public in 1796. For de Tracy, idéologie referred to a new
‘science of ideas’, literally an idea-ology. With a rationalist zeal typical of the
Enlightenment, he believed that it was possible to uncover the origins of
ideas objectively, and proclaimed that this new science would come to enjoy
the same status as established sciences such as biology and zoology.
• More boldly, since all forms of enquiry are based on ideas, de Tracy suggested
that ideology would eventually come to be recognized as the queen of the
sciences. However, despite these high expectations, this original meaning of
the term has had little impact on later usage, which has been influenced by
both Marxist and non-Marxist thinking.
What is ideology in Marx View
• Marx understood ideology as consisting of certain social ideas which
periodically dominate in class-divided societies. More precisely, ideology was
characterized as having a particular epistemological standing (being false or
misleading), social origin (arising from the opaque structure of class-divided
societies), and class function (sustaining the interests of the economically
dominant group).
What is ideology in Marx View
• Marx’s concept of ideology has a number of crucial features. First, ideology is about
delusion and mystification: it perpetrates a false or mistaken view of the world, what
Engels later referred to as ‘false consciousness’. Marx used ideology as a critical
concept, the purpose of which is to unmask a process of systematic mystification. His
own ideas he classified as scientific, because they were designed to accurately
uncover the workings of history and society. The contrast between ideology and
science, between falsehood and truth, was thus vital to Marx’s use of the term.
Second, ideology is linked to the class system. Marx believed that the distortion
implicit in ideology stems from the fact that it reflects the interests and perspective on
society of the ruling class. The ideology of a capitalist society is therefore bourgeois
ideology. The ruling class is unwilling to recognize itself as an oppressor and, equally,
is anxious to reconcile the oppressed to their oppression.
The Classical Origins of Western Political
Ideologies
• How should people organize their lives together in society?
• What rules should direct individual and collective behavior?
The Classical Origins of Western
Political Ideologies
• Greek political thought laid the foundation for modern governance. Socrates,
Plato, and Aristotle explored ideas like justice, virtue, and ideal leadership.
Their theories on forms of government and the role of philosophy in politics continue
to shape our understanding today.

• These ancient thinkers grappled with questions we still face:

What makes a good leader?
How should society be organized?
• Their ideas influence modern concepts like democracy, conservatism, and
socialism, showing the enduring relevance of classical Greek political philosophy.
Socrates and Plato
• In the fifth century BCE, Athenian philosopher Socrates maintained that people should seek
the answers to the most fundamental of life’s questions through reason, accepting as true
only ideas that have withstood criticism and can be stated clearly and precisely.
• Socrates’s legacy is preserved mostly through the writings of one of his pupils, Plato (428–348
BCE).
In The Republic, Plato develops a detailed, reasoned argument that political power should be vested in
individuals of exceptional skill who possess knowledge about the true nature of the world and a genuine
love of wisdom.
• Plato believed that philosophers best fit this bill and should hold unrestricted political power.
Such rulers would be free from temptations to corruption and would understand what is best
for the communities over which they rule. Such a government, Plato argued, would secure true
justice.
Socrates
• Emphasized questioning assumptions and seeking truth through dialogue
• Believed in the existence of universal, objective moral truths
• Argued the best form of government is led by wise and virtuous individuals
(philosopher-kings)
Plato
• Developed the concept of the "philosopher-king" in his work "The Republic"
Argued the ideal ruler should be a philosopher, as they possess wisdom and
knowledge
• Proposed a society divided into three classes: rulers (philosopher-kings),
guardians, and producers
• Believed in the existence of eternal, unchanging Forms or Ideas that
represent ultimate reality (Theory of Forms)
Aristotle
• Plato’s student Aristotle (384–322 BCE) agreed that either rule by a supremely wise and virtuous
ruler who attends to the good of the community, which he called a monarchy, or rule by a group
of such virtuous rulers, which he called an aristocracy, would be the ideal political condition.
• However, both Aristotle and Plato worried that a system in which rule was given to one man might
turn into a tyranny, with one person ruling only for their own good.
• Similarly, if rule was vested in a small group, that group may become an oligarchy, defined as rule
by a few in service of their own advantage.
• Given these possibilities, Aristotle asked if political rule could safely be lodged in the majority of
citizens in the form of a democracy. Aristotle suspected that this, again, might result in a form of
rule that would neglect the good of the whole in favor of the interests of the majority. Even
today, monarchs and authoritarian rulers often justify their rule based on skepticism about the
ability of the majority to pursue the interests of the whole of society
Aristotle
• Aristotle believed that the best hope that a majority of citizens could hold
political power and rule with the goal of securing the public good would be if
the majority of citizens were what is now called the middle class.
• Ideally, for Aristotle, political offices would reflect the wealth disparities that
exist, with both those with more wealth and those with less becoming political
leaders, and the society would have great respect for the rule of law. He
called such a form of government a Politeia.
Aristotle’s Categories of Political
Regimes
Comparison of classical Greek ideas

Similarities among Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle

• All emphasized the importance of reason, virtue, and justice in political life
• Believed in the existence of objective moral truths
• Advocated for the need for wise and virtuous leadership
Differences between the philosophers
• Socrates focused on questioning assumptions and seeking truth through dialogue
• Plato and Aristotle developed more systematic political theories
• Plato advocated for a society led by philosopher-kings and divided into distinct classes
• Aristotle favored a mixed constitution and placed greater emphasis on empirical observation
and classification of governments
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle
Foundational concepts in Greek
political thought
• Natural law: The idea that there are universal moral principles inherent in nature that should guide human
conduct and political systems
• Social contract: The notion that political authority and legitimacy are derived from the consent of the
governed
• City-state (polis): The primary political unit in ancient Greece, serving as the foundation for discussions on
governance and citizenship
• Republic: A form of government where power is held by the people and their elected representatives, as
explored in Plato's work
• Justice: A central concept in Greek philosophy, often defined as giving each person their due and
maintaining social harmony
• Virtue: The cultivation of moral excellence and good character, seen as essential for both rulers and citizens
• Citizenship: The status of belonging to a political community, with associated rights and responsibilities in
the governance of the city-state
Laws of Nature and Social Contract
• Early Christian thinkers conceived of government as a tool for advancing and
securing the Christian faith. Ultimately, many Christians concluded that the
structure and function of government should be based primarily not on what
human reason suggests but rather on the Bible. One early Christian thinker,
Tertullian (155–220 CE), argued that the revelations of God should supersede
human insights and should serve as the true foundation of political order.
Human reason, according to Tertullian, must always be secondary to the
Christian approach to life disclosed in scripture. In general, Tertullian’s ideas
would cast a large shadow over Western political thought until the early 17th
century, when thinkers such as English philosopher Thomas Hobbesonce
again championed greater reliance on human reason.
Thomas Hobbes (State of Nature and Social
Contract)
• Most of the systems that emerged across Europe after the fall of the western
half of the Roman Empire in the fifth century CE were monarchies that
promoted and defended Christianity to justify their rule. In the mid-1600s,
Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) argued that political systems should be judged
based not on their adherence to and glorification of a particular religion but
only on their role in securing social peace.
Thomas Hobbes
• Hobbes argued that humans can advance what he called laws of nature, or
rules based on human reason that, if all people followed them, would achieve
peace and safety. However, some overarching earthly authority is needed to
enforce these laws. In the absence of any political authority—what Hobbes
called the state of nature—following the laws of nature would make a person
vulnerable to attacks from those who did not follow them. Therefore, it would
be to each individual’s advantage to authorize what Hobbes called a
Leviathan—an enormously powerful governmental entity—to impose on all
people a symmetrical fear of punishment if they break the laws of nature.
Based on this thought experiment, Hobbes argued that individuals should
embrace a social contract, agreeing among themselves to give their loyalty to
a political ruler who could uphold the laws of nature with unrestricted power
John Locke
• English philosopher and physician John Locke (1632–1704) seized on Hobbes’s
concepts of the state of nature and a social contract among people, but his conception
of natural laws was very different. Locke saw natural laws as a set of moral rules,
discoverable by reason and based ultimately on the rationally provable existence of
God, that are equally applicable to all. Unlike Hobbes, Locke saw the natural laws, and
related natural rights, as placing obligations on everyone, whether or not a
government imposes uniform penalties for breaking them. The natural law establishes
natural rights and associated duties to others and to oneself. For Locke, one has, for
example, a natural right to life, and as a result, all others have a natural duty to
respect this natural right. Individuals have a duty to themselves not to commit suicide
or let their own natural talents go to waste. Each individual has a duty to respect the
natural rights of all other humans.
John Lock (State and Nature and Natural
Rights)
• Locke used the thought experiment of the state of nature to determine what
individuals who are rational but not subject to government would do.
• He imagined that in the state of nature each person would have the right to
punish those who violated anyone’s natural rights.
• Locke argued that individuals in the state of nature would be entitled to own
land only if they mixed it with what they inherently owned—their bodies and
their bodies’ labor.
• However, individuals could acquire land only if doing so did not harm the
ability of those who did not own land to live and prosper.
John Locke
Applying Locke’s Ideas to Global
Trade
• Locke’s writings exerted a profound influence on the emergence of the Enlightenment (1690s–1790s), a
period in Western history that emphasized the ordering of social, political, and religious life solely on the
basis of reason. Before the 18th century, most political regimes enacted protectionist or mercantilist
policies—that is, policies that discriminated against other countries’ imports and subsidized exports.
• In The Wealth of Nations (1776), Adam Smith (1723–1790) applies to international trade Locke’s
principle that the free exchange of goods and services leads to prosperity for all. Smith argues that
countries should lower their tariffs on imports, reduce subsidies for exports, and allow a free market to
emerge among all nations. This, he argues, enables nations to specialize in those exports for which they
have a comparative advantage, or a competitive edge over other countries in producing and selling
particular goods, while affording their citizens lower prices on imports from countries that have a
comparative advantage in other areas of production. As counterintuitive as that struck many at the
time, reason, Smith maintains, shows that the wealth of a nation grows in proportion to its freedom of
trade.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau
• Jean-Jacques Rousseau adopted Locke’s state of nature, less as a thought
experiment and more as an actual anthropological account of human history.
Rousseau argued that “man was/ is born free, and everywhere he is in
chains.” All humans have a natural right to be free and a natural compassion
toward others. However, humans are enslaved by the desire for wealth and
social status, and that has resulted in the creation of oppressive political
regimes.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau Civil Religion and Social
Contract
• In The Social Contract, Rousseau argues that in order to liberate
themselves, a group must first develop a heightened sense of collective
identity as they confront a common challenge. Charismatic leaders must
cultivate among the people a common religious sentiment—what Rousseau
calls a civil religion—that defines citizens as brothers and sisters and teaches
respect for religious differences. This civil religion would deepen the sense
of collective identity among the population.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau Civil Religion and
General Will
• Rousseau argues that the laws such an assembly would pass would secure
the general will—that is, the true good of each and every person in society.
These laws would reduce income inequality and institute a system of civic
education that would reinforce the civic religion and seek to cultivate civic
virtue, a firmly rooted disposition to hold the good of the political community
above narrow self-interest.
Rousseau: The Social Contract
Hobbes vs. Locke vs. Rousseau - Social
Contract Theories Compared
The Development of Varieties of
Liberalism
• Many of the of the most prominent political ideologies today have their roots
in classical liberalism, a set of ideas that emerged in the 18th century.
Classical Liberalism
• Classical liberalism is a system of thought that combines elements of natural
rights, limited government, and capitalism. Capitalism is an economic
arrangement based on private property and the freedom to invest one’s
wealth or talent in pursuit of profit. Classical liberalism endorses capitalism
both within a country and in free trade among nations, as long as free trade is
conducted within the moral limits of the natural law. Locke would say that
classical liberalism endorses liberty, but it does not endorse moral license, or
the freedom to act in ways that are destructive of the rights of others, the
self, or the foundations of social peace and prosperity.2
Classical liberalism
• Classical liberalism was revolutionary. It inspired the overthrow of King James II of England and
influenced the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution (1776–1783).
• Later, it inspired thinkers to reflect on the forms of government that best prevent governmental abuse
of power. Some argued that expanding suffrage, or the right to vote, enhances the people’s ability to
ward off such abuse. For this reason, the framers of the US Constitution generally held that all male
citizens who owned property should be entitled to vote for representatives.
• Benjamin Franklin went further, arguing that all adult White male citizens should be allowed to vote, a
position the United States would adopt by the 1830s.25 Defenders of expanding the right to vote
argued that all citizens of a minimum age (excluding felons) should be entitled to vote because no
person will protect an individual’s rights more than the person themselves.
• Building on these ideas, an argument emerged for prizing the intrinsic value of voting as a reflection of
political equality.26 In 1870, the 15th Amendment to the US Constitution expanded the right to vote to
Black Americans, and in 1920, the 19th Amendment afforded the right to women.
John Stuart Mill and the Expansion of Personal
Liberty
• In his work The Subjection of Women (1869), English writer John Stuart Mill
(1806–1873) argues for the full inclusion of women in the rights that were
emerging in societies based on classical liberalism. In 1859, Mill published On
Liberty, advancing the argument that modern societies should expand their
commitment to the value of individual freedom. In it, Mill argues that because
even great leaders supported by a broad social consensus can make terrible
mistakes, it is to society’s advantage to encourage open debate and
discussion of all views, however unpopular. Liberty, he argues, should be
broadened not only in matters of speech and the press but also so that the
law does not restrict the freedom of adults—even if individual adults exercise
their freedom in ways that cause them personal harm, as long as that
exercise does not harm another person.
John Stuart Mill’s The Harm Principle