4 ms·

There are a lot of comments saying that "avoiding ideology is an ideology" or "preferring individuals over groups is an ideology." These aren't very interestin

There are a lot of comments saying that "avoiding ideology is an ideology" or "preferring individuals over groups is an ideology." These aren't very interesting observations, they don't match the contextual defenition of "ideology" we can infer from the author's usage, and they don't really move the discussion forward. This quote (ignoring the appeal to a desire to be part of the "thinking people" group) is a more interesting point, in my reading, and I'd like to see more discussion about this: > Ideology is inescapable. To some extent, everyone is under its influence. But that does not mean that all are equally ideological; thinking people can adopt flexible stances, mixing traditions. Given the imperfections of ideology, I prefer this approach. It's the "flexible stances, mixing traditions" part that is interesting here. 10-20 years ago, at least in the US, I recall reading that "independent" was the fastest growing political alignment. How did the polarizing elements of society break that trend, and how can a diversity of ideas be restored?

droptablemain 5y ago
"Independent" is a rather vague term. Usually in the U.S. it means that one does not align with either of the approved dominant parties. So an "independent" may very well be a libertarian or a communist, ideologically speaking.
- nitrogen 5y ago
  Sure, but as I quoted, "It's the "flexible stances, mixing traditions" part that is interesting here. Why don't we see more of that?
  - droptablemain 5y ago
    My perspective is that the Overton window for politics in the U.S. is very narrowly defined between what I would consider to be two center-right parties, economically speaking. If you had more of a political spectrum of representation/viability, then you'd probably see more political diversity as you do in many parliamentary governments around the world. There does seem to be more of this emerging in the U.S., although it's still in very small pockets -- for example, you will find some socialist groups that intermix aspects of social conservatism or traditionalism with leftist economics.
  - atoav 5y ago
    My guess: you probably see it, but it is being put into a party political box pretty quickly. If I as a independent free thinking person — which has never set a foot in the US — critizise a policy objectively and on rational grounds I can gurantuee you that people will call me out as a member of the opposite party, rather than enlighten me why what I said is flawed. If anybody who opposes your parties views is (dis-)counted as part of the other party, you get an easy way out when someone's argument starts challenging your world view. Also: Flexibility is in itself not a value. A flexible thinker can be one that honors the truth and enlightenment to such a degree they change their mind when the evidence shows they are wrong. Or a flexible thinker could be someone who always adjusts the facts to fit their story, because all they care about is winning — and of that you can see a lot. Flexibility is a necessity, but ultimately the goals count. Is your goal to make society better? To survive? To get rich? To tell the truth? To "show" the other side with a deep rooted (yet unreflected) passion?
  - DarylZero 5y ago
    Where are you looking? Seems like there's every political thing you could imagine all just on Twitter.
pyrale 5y ago
> These aren't very interesting observations, they don't match the contextual defenition of "ideology" we can infer from the author's usage, and they don't really move the discussion forward. If we need to start the discussion by agreeing to a flawed definition given by the author, the discussion isn't going to go very far, is it? > 10-20 years ago, at least in the US, I recall reading that "independent" was the fastest growing political alignment. How did the polarizing elements of society break that trend, and how can a diversity of ideas be restored? The wave of independents you talk about is just a mark of traditional parties failing to discuss issues that appeal to people. New political movements, which you call "polarizing" are a logical consequence of that. > how can a diversity of ideas be restored? Having polarizing debates doesn't mean there is no diversity. People can have polarizing views on plenty of topics. That's part of why so many people with radical ideas are at each other's throats on both side of the aisle.
- nitrogen 5y ago
  > > It's the "flexible stances, mixing traditions" part that is interesting here. Do you have any thoughts on this part?
  - pyrale 5y ago
    I would suggest that the ability to consider ideological standpoints with a detached interest is usually the sign that you are not personally on the hook about it. Of course, it is probably nice for someone to never find themselves on the hook, but at the same time, this kind of luxury is not available for everyone. For instance, someone having trouble paying the rent may resent wintertime evictions more personally than a homeowner. Likewise, a blue-collar worker may have a more personal position about globalization about than a software engineer. I'm not sure we should view this luxury as a superior attitude.
- robocat 5y ago
  This article talks more in depth about what Zizek means by ideology:https://iep.utm.edu/zizek/ https://iep.utm.edu/zizek/ I don't have the background to say if Zizek is misusing it, but on my extremely shallow reading I don't think he is. And your dismissal would be seen as meta-ideological.
akvadrako 5y ago
Most Americans are politically independent and it's growing. https://news.gallup.com/poll/388781/political-party-preferences-shifted-greatly-during-2021.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/388781/political-party-preferen...?

droptablemain 5y ago

"Independent" is a rather vague term. Usually in the U.S. it means that one does not align with either of the approved dominant parties. So an "independent" may very well be a libertarian or a communist, ideologically speaking.

nitrogen 5y ago
Sure, but as I quoted, "It's the "flexible stances, mixing traditions" part that is interesting here. Why don't we see more of that?
- droptablemain 5y ago
  My perspective is that the Overton window for politics in the U.S. is very narrowly defined between what I would consider to be two center-right parties, economically speaking. If you had more of a political spectrum of representation/viability, then you'd probably see more political diversity as you do in many parliamentary governments around the world. There does seem to be more of this emerging in the U.S., although it's still in very small pockets -- for example, you will find some socialist groups that intermix aspects of social conservatism or traditionalism with leftist economics.
- atoav 5y ago
  My guess: you probably see it, but it is being put into a party political box pretty quickly. If I as a independent free thinking person — which has never set a foot in the US — critizise a policy objectively and on rational grounds I can gurantuee you that people will call me out as a member of the opposite party, rather than enlighten me why what I said is flawed. If anybody who opposes your parties views is (dis-)counted as part of the other party, you get an easy way out when someone's argument starts challenging your world view. Also: Flexibility is in itself not a value. A flexible thinker can be one that honors the truth and enlightenment to such a degree they change their mind when the evidence shows they are wrong. Or a flexible thinker could be someone who always adjusts the facts to fit their story, because all they care about is winning — and of that you can see a lot. Flexibility is a necessity, but ultimately the goals count. Is your goal to make society better? To survive? To get rich? To tell the truth? To "show" the other side with a deep rooted (yet unreflected) passion?
- DarylZero 5y ago
  Where are you looking? Seems like there's every political thing you could imagine all just on Twitter.

pyrale 5y ago

> These aren't very interesting observations, they don't match the contextual defenition of "ideology" we can infer from the author's usage, and they don't really move the discussion forward. If we need to start the discussion by agreeing to a flawed definition given by the author, the discussion isn't going to go very far, is it? > 10-20 years ago, at least in the US, I recall reading that "independent" was the fastest growing political alignment. How did the polarizing elements of society break that trend, and how can a diversity of ideas be restored? The wave of independents you talk about is just a mark of traditional parties failing to discuss issues that appeal to people. New political movements, which you call "polarizing" are a logical consequence of that. > how can a diversity of ideas be restored? Having polarizing debates doesn't mean there is no diversity. People can have polarizing views on plenty of topics. That's part of why so many people with radical ideas are at each other's throats on both side of the aisle.

nitrogen 5y ago
> > It's the "flexible stances, mixing traditions" part that is interesting here. Do you have any thoughts on this part?
- pyrale 5y ago
  I would suggest that the ability to consider ideological standpoints with a detached interest is usually the sign that you are not personally on the hook about it. Of course, it is probably nice for someone to never find themselves on the hook, but at the same time, this kind of luxury is not available for everyone. For instance, someone having trouble paying the rent may resent wintertime evictions more personally than a homeowner. Likewise, a blue-collar worker may have a more personal position about globalization about than a software engineer. I'm not sure we should view this luxury as a superior attitude.
robocat 5y ago
This article talks more in depth about what Zizek means by ideology:https://iep.utm.edu/zizek/ https://iep.utm.edu/zizek/ I don't have the background to say if Zizek is misusing it, but on my extremely shallow reading I don't think he is. And your dismissal would be seen as meta-ideological.

akvadrako 5y ago

Most Americans are politically independent and it's growing. https://news.gallup.com/poll/388781/political-party-preferences-shifted-greatly-during-2021.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/388781/political-party-preferen...?