Brooke Marcy

 

A summary of Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses by Louis Althusser

 

In the essay, Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses, Louis Althusser begins by pointing out that for production to succeed, the creation of the means of production must simultaneously be established.  He states that without the “reproduction of the conditions of production” the production itself would ultimately fail.  One form of production is often reliant on others, creating a complicated chain, so when one fails many can suffer. An important link in this chain of production is the wage driven labor power. Earning a wage enables a person to support themselves and their families, which perpetuates a continued need for earning.  To generate the greatest output, it is necessary for the labor power to possess diversity of knowledge and skills. This diversity is created by the “capitalist education system”, which depending on the amount of study, can prepare the student to work productively in a variety of roles.  Yet, a technical knowledge is not the only thing taught, students also learn the “rules of good behavior.” These rules teach a respect for the dominant class and the “subjection to the ruling ideology”, thus repressing the workers by dictating the roles they will play.

 

Louis Althusser next examines Marx views of the social whole, which consists of the economic base and the superstructure.  The relationship between these two structures is dependent and reciprocal, and without a solid base the superstructure would not survive.  He also discusses Marx’s descriptive theory of State, defining it as a “machine of repression” perpetuated by the dominance of the ruling class.  To expand on this definition, Althusses adds the State apparatus, consisting of police, courts, prisons and the army, supporting a  “dictatorship of the bourgeoisie,” and State power, which is constantly struggled over by dominant class fractions.  State power and State apparatus are two separate entities and should not be confused.  The possession of State power affects the apparatus, but the apparatus will still function without the State power. On the other hand, the only way to transform the apparatus is to destroy and replace preexisting State power.

 

Althusser next expands on the definition of the State by introducing the new concept of the ideological state apparatus, not to be confused with the State apparatus, though both contain aspects of each other. Unlike the violence driven State apparatus, the ISA functions by the incorporation of ideologies taught in institutions including schools, churches, families etc…  The ideologies, though diverse, function as a unified body under the ideology of the dominant class who control State power.  Though unified, ISA is still a reflection of class struggle and influenced by the ruling class ideology. In order to work properly, the State apparatus must include both violence (SA) and ideology (ISA), and it is the job of the State power to unify both apparatus, creating a harmonious, stable, submissive and productive work force.

 

Unlike the singular State apparatus, there are a number of ideological state apparatuses, which over the years have shifted in dominance. For example, the dominance of the church has been replaced by education. Similarly, State power has shifted from the landed aristocracy to the industrial bourgeoisie.  Althusser points out that it is the education apparatus that perpetuates the ideals of the ruling class and per motes the “capitalist relations of exploitation.”  At a very early age children are taught in school what to think and how to properly act and function in society.  Though schools claim to be neutral institutions for learning, they are in fact machines designed to manufacture people to fit into specific roles whether it is the role of the exploited or the “agent of exploitation.”

 

Next Althusser examines the nature of ideology.  He replaces the definition of ideologies as a “history of social formation,” with the idea that ideology in general has no history of its own, inferring that ideology is nothing more than an internal illusion of reality.  He states that the only true reality is that of everyday life and that “ideology represents the imaginary relationship of individuals to their real conditions of existence.”  This blurring of illusion and reality combines to form a reality of existence, which throughout history, has acted as a tool for some to manipulate to gain dominance over others. Althusser also looks at how the existence of ideology within an apparatus makes its existence material.  Humans act on their beliefs derived from ideas based on material actions and rituals defined by the ideological apparatus, and it is these beliefs that dictate behavior and create human consciousness.

 

Althusser proposes that, “there is no ideology except by the subject and for the subject.”  He goes on to look at how all ideology functions to identify individuals as subjects.  He defines “subject” as a person living naturally in ideology and that it is through ideology that we are recognized as separate and irreplaceable individuals.  Subject and individual are two separate entities, and to make his point, Althusser uses the example of a person being hailed on the street.  The minute a person being hailed turns their head; they change from a non-specific individual into a specific subject. The reason behind the turn of the head is the eternal existence of ideology, which identifies subjects among individuals. Here Althusser point out that if ideology is internal then“ individuals are always-already subject.”

 

Althusser continues by examining Christian religious ideology. Once again, the ideology revolves around the transformation form individual to subject, but here there must be a belief in the existence of the ultimate Subject (God).  It is within this belief that the subject molds their own existence, and if the subject lives their life by the example of the Subject, then like Christ, the subject will find salvation by “re-entering the Subject.”  This creates an absolute existence with no questions, if one behaves in a specific way, they will be rewarded.  Althusser terms this ideology a “ mirror-structure,” and states,” this mirror duplication is constitutive of ideology and ensures its functioning.” He points out that without subjection there would be no subject and ideology boils down to the need for “ the reproduction of the relations of production and of the relations derived from them.”  In other words, all that must be is and remains so to ensure continued production.

 

Althusser concludes by stating that the relationship he has discussed between Superstructure and infrastructure is abstract and problematic, bringing up several questions. He examines how class struggle is not addressed when looking at the “total process,” and how this struggle effects the generalization of ideology. He notes that even the provenance of the ideology of the ruling class is more complicated than what was earlier stated and is derived by other sources. He states,” ideologies are not “born” in the ISAs but from social classes at grips in the class struggle: from their conditions of existence, their practices, their experience of struggle, etc.”