The History of Ideology

The History of Ideology Its easy to say that ideology is something that belongs to mind, or to words that are easier to understand than to think. Thinking is what we do every day; this is the way I answered the question related to ideology. So in this essay, I will take a deeper look at the term ideology in of Marxism and why his idea is famous in anti-capitalism. Ideology is a system of perspectives, ideas, and these built on a philosophical foundation through a consistent worldview and methodology. They represent the will and aspirations of a class, people, formed by individual practices, and back to direct the training, to improve reality. Any thought is due to the physical conditions of life, the social order and the reflection of the material situation of the secular regime. Since the emergence of private ownership and associated with it the division of society into classes: domination and power, oppression and oppression In social consciousness also began to appear and constantly develop ideas expressing the opposition of interests, the struggle between classes. I will refute this view as follows: as I cannot point to any person and say I have no idea. Maybe the thoughts in his head did not form a scholastic system, or it consisted of the fragmented parts of different academic theories. But not so that I was entitled to say that he has no idea at all. For example, when it comes to accepting a particular set of problems A B C D E, he only resolves to take AB, but refuses to recognize C D, and ignores E; Then we say that he has conservative thoughts. Apparently, thinking has been transformed into action that does not exist in the literary form anymore. Thus, one can say that thought not only exists in the shape of educational theoretical systems but that it only makes it easy to approach thought. Zizek has explained his idea of ideology through a trash can or can understand that a system, he explained that ideology let us be controlled inside a system (Japhy, 2017, 3/2). But he also emphasized the importance of ideology that they give human motivation a reason to exist in life. Later, major ideas in the world were used to highlight the two great ideas capitalist, and communist. Its the model that states in the world are doing. And through propaganda activities in all forms such as the media, no matter what the issue is, is a message to make sure that the ideology is still favored by the people while under control. (Japhy, 2017, 3/2) Zizek also explained the vitality, the existence of the capitalist economy on how to promote such strength. He argues that it is the competitive market that is a free market, so firms will always want to reach out to and serve the consumer. That this product is better than the competitors product. It is the consumers appetite that creates a circulation for the developed market when the consumers desire is endless. The more you drink, the thirstier you get. This has created an impetus that invisibly promotes the market in creating jobs for the working-class. Ideology is to be understood as fetishism. It is used as a material to control human thinking and their beliefs. And that is the origin of capitalism. It gives money power to control people. They are willing to do everything to get it. Because of the obvious truth, the human is living in the secular age. That everything can be traded together. And that is one of the features of capitalism when it raises the issue of a free market where labor is cashed (Japhy, 2017, 10/2). But Marx also posed a problem that was the imbalance of capitalism. Smith argued that the individuals pursuit of self-interest would lead to an outcome beneficial to all, whereas Marx argued that the pursuit of self-interest would lead to anarchy, crisis, and the dissolution of the private property-based system itself. . . . Smith spoke of the invisible hand guiding individual, self-interested agents to perform those actions that would be, despite their lack of concern for such an outcome, socially optimal; for Marxism the simile is the iron fist of competition, pulverizing the workers and making them worse off than they would be in another feasible system, namely, one based on the social or public ownership of property (Roemer 1988, 2-3). But Marx also posed a problem that was the imbalance of capitalism. Because life is not balanced, there is a difference in class. Marx argues that this difference is due to the capitalist class, or the em ployer, who values the labor force, not in proportion to what the worker pays. On the contrary, the products are sold at high prices beyond the affordability of employees. And then the question is why the money is just a symbolic, unrealistic value that is represented by the numbers on paper but is so influential in human life. After Marx pointed out the basics of capitalism, launched the world workers movement, through the struggles of workers, of national liberation movements, Capitalism had self-correcting, economic and political theories born in the twentieth century have significantly contributed to changing the face of capitalism. In 1990 at a Paris symposium on Marx, the invited President stated that Marx was the savior of capitalism for pointing out its fundamental errors. Actually, about form, capitalism has changed a lot. But the nature of capitalism cannot be modified. That nature is a profitable, profitable way, including the adoption of political and military activities. Instead of forming a direct domination, capitalism creates an entirely democratically controlled state that is completely dependent on the political economy. Karl Marx argues that communism will be the final stage of history, achieved through a proletarian revolution. In communist society, decisions about what to produce and pursue policies are democratically chosen, allowing all members of society to participate in decision-making in both areas, political and economic. The production and distribution of wealth are reasonably made among citizens. Karl Marx never described in detail how communism would function as a socio-economic system, but it was understood that a communist economy would be based on the idea of equal share among its citizens. Marx asserts that the only way to solve these problems is by the working class (proletarians), who according to Marx are the main force that produces material wealth in society and are privately owned. The exploitative (bourgeois) empire stands up as a ruling class in place of the bourgeoisie to establish a free society, regardless of class or race. The state representing workers who have been orga nized into the dominant class will control the means of production for the benefit of society. Marx does not create what is now called communism. But the idea of producing and distributing wealth equitably carried out among citizens gives each other confidence in the proletariat or labor. Which it goes against the concept of capitalism at that time. Marxism became more popular and viral after Lenin successfully applied his theory and his idea. Marxism-Leninism was widely acknowledged in socialist countries such as the Soviet Union or China and Vietnam today. When Leninism-Stalinism suddenly adopted the term proletarian ideology in the late 1920s in order to designate not the distortion of proletarian consciousness under the pressure of bourgeois ideology but the very subjective driving force of proletarian revolutionary activity, this shift in the notion of ideology was strictly correlative to the reinterpretation of Marxism itself as an impartial objective science' (Zizek, Mapping Ideology 9). At the time of Marx, due to the influence of the revolutions in Europe and the Americas, people resorted to violent means of seizing power to deal with socio-economic problems without seeing the power. A lot of peaceful solutions by compromise and dialogue. Marx criticized and denied utopian socialism for its failure as a testimony to the need for socialist revolution. Violent revolutionary measures can give a very immediate result when the public is motivated to stand up for the revolution. But it will endure massive social losses for a long time, and When it is necessary to restrain the revolution and bring it back to a peaceful and friendly state, it is tough and time-consuming and enormous loss. Nonviolent peace measures, though slowly and seemingly ineffective, can, in fact, resolve the conflict once the conflict is ripe because society is the totality of communal forces. Assembly and forces are in need of each other, so they can adjust themselves to deal with conflicts. After t he death of Marx, the world has changed profoundly, and there have emerged effective methods of peaceful struggle through institutions such as unions, social organizations, social media, and religion. As one bitter critic put it, In the name of human progress, Marx has probably caused more death, misery, degradation and despair than any man who ever lived (Downs 1983, 299). 1487 words Bibliography Downs, Robert B. 1983. Books That Changed the World. 2d ed. New York: Penguin. Roemer, John E. 1988. Free to Lose. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Skousen, Mark. The Big Three In Economics. 1st ed. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe, 2007. Print.