SOCIAL PROCESSES AND IDEOLIGIZATION

At present we are witnessing the collapse of ideological systems in Ea stern Europe. The western industrial countries comment on this develop ment by pointing out to the non-existence of ideologies in their own s ocieties. This is already an ideological fixation, a deception, becaus e ideologies are an ubiquitous phenomenon, which can be found in any s ociety. The French philosopher de Tracy was the first to coin the term >>ideology<<. With the help of this >>theory about the development of ideas<< in connection with the processes of sensual perception he wan ted to analyze the fixations and errors in the established system of i deas of absolutism in order to get to the so-called >>true ideas<<: a system of natural order and natural law, which should replace the rigi d and dysfunctional system of absolutism. Ideology thus was at its beg inning an instrument for criticizing absolutism and had a strong under current of enlightenment and democracy. But ideology also developed in its very early stage a second meaning and function. Within the framew ork of the positivism of French sociology of Auguste Comte and others ideology got another significance. It was understood as the unscientif ic, subjective elements in science, the blurring of the theoretically possible scientific perception through subjective feelings. The positi vists strive for a >>clean<<, value-free relationship between scientif ic statements and the facts of the outside world, that means the denia l of the subjective factor. Karl Marx saw ideology as an inevitable an d ubiquitous phenomenon, being the product of the material economic co nditions, the organization production. Thus the participants in the ec onomic production process are not able to perceive the real situation of alienation and exploitation, they are prone to ideological deceptio ns. While the young Marx still believed in the utopian potential in an y ideology, containing a >>dream<< of a better world, Marx later saw i deology as a mere reflection of the economic situation. He regarded id eology as the consciousness of the classes: the proletarians have the >>right<< ideology, the capitalists the >>wrong<< one. In his understa nding only the change of the economic system can overcome the ideologi cal system of capitalism. While the Critical Theory (Adorno, Horckheim er) regards ideology as part of a comprehensive social process of camo uflage by the economy, the mass media and culture industry, which can only be overcome by the critical attitude of the intellectual, who is able to understand this camouflage, Karl Mannheim starts from the assu mption, that the influence of ideologies in science can be minimized b y the analysis of interests. By comparing the ideologies, the >>group philosophies of life<< of different social groups or scientific school s, one can reach scientific knowledge of provisional validity, if one keeps its relativity in mind. The author agrees with this theory of id eology and stresses the significance of open, >>gliding<< terms (Mannh eim) and of the comparison of scientific theories in order to minimize ideological fixations. He underlines the important critical function of fringe groups and dissidents in society, which have a greater dista nce to the prevailing ideologies of society and are thus in a better p osition to perceive and criticize the ideological structures of societ y. The author points out that ideologies in its present form are cultu ral reactions of the societies to the dissolution of the pre-industria l societies with its uniform philosophies of life supplied by the chur ch and the monarchy. The ideologies are a correlate of the formation o f large social groups within society during the Industrial Revolution. They allow the individuals a social identification and orientation, a re an instrument for mobilizing the social groups in social conflicts and a means of demarcating the social group in relation to other group s. As long as the structures of ideology are rather open and flexible and as long as it is tolerant towards other ideologies, its social fun ction is constructive. But when it becomes rigid, when it is used as m eans for repression within society and as means of mobilisation in mil itary conflicts with other societies, its function turns destructive. In their degree of constructivity or destructiveness ideologies are re flections of the present state of their societies: Thus the states in Eastern Europe return to ideologies of national states, because they w ant to cope with the large extent of social change and economic disarr ay and they hope that this ideology will provide them with a potential of integration. On the other hand the states in Western Europe with t heir rather stable economic systems slowly turn away from the ideology of the national state towards more comprehensive concepts, i.e. Europ ean concepts. Ideologies must reflect to a sufficient degree the speci fic cultural roots and conditions of societies, when they are to fulfi ll constructive social functions. That is the reason why the African a nd Asian states were not successful in taking over the ideological sys tems of the West and of the Soviet version of Marxism-Leninism in the phase of decolonisation, because both systems did not fit sufficiently to the living conditions in the Third World, their cultural and econo mic traditions. The same problem is to be expected in Eastern Europe w hen the states take over the Western ideology of market economy. When ideologies lose their Constructive function because their are >>out of date<<, they have to be replaced by new ideas. Thus societies must be ready for a permanent discussion of their basic systems of conviction s and values. The knowledge that all standpoints and theories are rela tive and are influenced by the history and cultural tradtion of a soci ety, by its present social and political situation, should lead us to more tolerance and to a comprehensive>> global<< thinking, integrating the ideas of other nations and cultures.