> Well, why not take Marx's advice on ideology critique, then? If you
> want to understand an ideology, listen to what concepts it leaves out.
> I think a fine first target is marxism itself.
>
> As I understand, orthodox marxists leave out the intellectuals, the
> ones in charge of these ideologies and theories. Their class has been
> named: Ehrenreich calls it the "professional-managerial class", Dijas
> might've called it the western "New Class," etc. In the West, their
> power lies in ideas.
Which intellectuals? the ones in charge of proffering apologetics for capitalism or, as Gramsci called them, the "organic intellectuals" who attempt to form a new ideological basis for critiquing these social relations based on a more accurate understanding of how they disproportionately affect different classes? I guess you could throw them all in the same bag and drown the lot in the river, but that seems to be a bit counter productive and, as many have said, somewhat anti-intellectual. After all, who are Ehrenreich and Dijas in your account? Aren't they intellectuals as well?
This, I think, points to the need to specify ideologies in relation to historical blocs of socio-economic power and the process through which they are able to gain what appears to be a hegemonic dominance (defined, as Perry Anderson has pointed out, through a varying combination of coercion and consent. In other words, ideology always operates best with the threat of force for non-compliance, a threat which, at least in western, industrial society, usually corresponds with a certain capture of the institutions of the nation-state.) In so far as intellectuals work to justify or legitimate this status quo, then they could be seen to be supporting instruments of the dominant ideology, but this would be something to be discussed on a case by case basis. And, even if one were to be able to analytically consider this, it still doesn't quite explain why or if people believe them. In other words, there's still plenty of room for discussing and making ideology more technical as a concept which operates in different ways in different social and historical contexts, yet still has common functions in general.
s