The Relationship Between Ideology and the Proletariat Kimberly Chuang

Tufts University, Class of 2010 The thesis we seek to address will understandably

function per se, and so what we will mean whenever

elicit some incredulity from Marxists, as we defend

we refer to the ‘proletarian function’, will be its

in this essay that the proletariat, in a manner of

behaviour, practises, and characteristics. If it can be

speaking, does indeed have ideology. The concept of

then shown that the function of ideology is identical

ideology as specific to Analytical Marxism is

to the function of the proletariat class, then the

commonly known as a pejorative one. Although

proletariat does indeed have ideology. If the contrary

ideology can be broadly defined as any collection of

is found to be true and the function of ideology is

normative theories or doctrines used to describe the

dissimilar to that of the proletariat, then it can be

world, the sense of ideology as known to Marxist

concluded that the proletariat does not effectuate

study renders it seemingly irreconcilable with the

ideals. For instance, if it can be shown that the

proletariat. In this uniquely Marxist sense (which is

ideological function is that of subjugation and

that sense in which ideology will be understood

preservation of the exploitative capitalist reality, and

throughout this essay), ideology is necessarily class

it can be correspondingly shown that the proletariat

ideology. This class ideology has two essential

under capitalism inevitably submit themselves to

properties: it propagates a false consciousness, and

systematic repression, then this consistency in

almost exclusively services particular class interests.

1

function will indicate the presence of ideology in the

In appropriating the general definition of ideology

proletariat. This approach will determine the

toward classed ends, class ideology thus becomes an

progression of the essay in the following manner:

effective means by which the interests of a dominant

First, the emergence of the ideological institution

class are enforced and maintained. As such, ideology

will be disclosed in order to determine the function

is false consciousness when it is internalized. This is

of ideology, succeeded by an establishment of the

applicable to both the capitalists whose interests are

function of the proletariat. Next, we must introduce

furthered by their internalization of class ideology,

criteria of social consciousness by which the

and the proletariat who further capitalist interests by

proletariat can be rendered divisible into three

internalizing class ideology. Because the proletariat

distinct proletarian stages for analysis. Because

are optimistically understood as the catalytic group

ambiguities arise in both the persistence of a

responsible for bringing about a rejection of

continued ‘proletarian’ proletariat, as well as the

capitalism resulting in Communism, they thus

semantics of our argument, these will be both

initially seem to be wholly opposed to ‘having’

subsequently addressed. We will then conclude the

ideology. Although we will later elaborate on what is

essay with the promised evaluation of functional

meant by ‘having’ ideology, for now it is sufficient to

consistency between the three identified proletarian

say that to ‘have’ ideology is to subscribe to the false

stages and ideology as so to determine the extent to

consciousness and fictitious reality that further

which ideology is possessed by each proletarian

capitalist interests.

instantiation.

The methodology that this essay pursues in arguing

To understand the function of ideology, it is perhaps

for our rather unintuitive thesis then, will be one in

best to begin exegetically with the means by which

which the functions unique to class ideology and the

ideology develops. It will be possible to determine

proletariat will be first sought and established. As a

the function of ideology once we have schematically

social class, the proletariat will not perform a

outlined this context in which it is integrated. The

Chuang · 45

Marxist conception of a social whole is partitioned

production and ideology do enter as terms into a

into an economic “base” comprised of the totality of

functionally explained relationship then, we must

production relations (but to the exclusion of the

first

productive force terms contained by relations of

Reification is the reduction of economic relations to

production)2 and a “superstructure”; which is itself

more material forms by privileging the material yield

divided into a “politico-legal” State and legal

of labour—the commodity, over the relations of

constituent, and an ideological constituent. In this

production (such as that existent between labourers

manner, the instantiation of productive relations as

and that of the labourer and capitalist) actually

exploitative and commodified capitalist relations

responsible.

facilitates the superstructural levels of capitalist

comprise

State and ideology. Although the relations between

fundamental units of production (excluding their

the social constituents of State and the reified

productive force terms) to which the origin of

productive relations of the base reciprocally facilitate

commodities must be attributed. With reified

each others’ cohesion and reproduction (in that State

economic

as a repressive apparatus functions to violently

commodity being viewed as a product of these

enforce

3

iniquitous

Because

the

its

relations

economic

relations,

and

of

base,

however,

entailments.

production

they

are

instead

of

the

the

and

economic social relations, it is accredited with bringing about the very social relation in fact

in political and legal forms),4 he relationship

responsible for it. In being regarded as secondary to

between the State ideological apparatus and the

the commodity, the labourers involved in these

economic “base” is one of functional explanation.5

economic social relations soon come to see their

The

work

is

functionally

relations

reification

economic social relationships find their expression

base

productive

describe

explained

by

the

as

not

occurring

between

two

private

superstructure. This is to say that, in accordance

individuals, but rather “material relations between

with rules of functional explanation, the capitalist

people and social relations between things.”7 Reified

situation was such that an economic basis developed

economic relations thereby present themselves as

as so to furnish the stabilising functions of a

independent of human actions by rendering their

superstructure. The superstructure thus requires the

essentially human economic relations interactions

support

is

between objects instead. The relations of producers

correspondingly strengthened and weakened to the

to one another come to assume the appearance of

extent that it “promotes or frustrates” the operation

interactions between commodities. This privileging

of the economic relations that sustain it.6 Situated

of the commodity product of labour promotes the

within this macroscopic ordering of base and

illusion that it is the commodity that motivates the

superstructure, the relations of production (that

capitalist economy and not the economic social

comprise the economic base) and ideology (a

relations. Eventually, it is not merely the social

superstructural institution) that this essay will

relations that are reified, but the participants in the

address can likewise be expressed as terms in a

interactions themselves: following the alienation of

statement of functional explanation. In order for

human labour (in which the productive capacity is

ideology to functionally explain productive relations,

commodified and marketed), human beings become

however, such relations of production cannot be

mere appendages of a capitalist machine with both

ordinary,

relations;

the commodification of their productive capacity and

rather, ideological relations of production must be

their resulting labours abstracted into a measurable

reified capitalist economic relations. As such, this

quantitative form of monetary units. In this manner,

functional relationship can only be seen upon the

reification deprives those economic relations of their

reification of economic relations, as it is this very

origins as human interactions and mystifies the

reification that promotes false consciousness and

transaction of labour for wages, as the amount of

with it, ideology.

labour a product inheres is unapparent. The event of

of

the

economic

non-exploitative

base,

productive

and

surplus In order to demonstrate that reified relations of

Chuang · 46

value

unexplained

and

incursion

then,

unnoticed.

goes

Reified

largely economic

relations thus favour capitalist interests, as they

proletariat

function

self-repressively.

This

is

conceal the exploitative qualities of capitalist

accomplished, however, through the dominant

production from the proletarian labourers.

ideological State apparatus. The dominant State apparatus exists as the “educational ideological

Capitalism promotes these untruths of reification as

apparatus.”9 This installation of the bourgeoisie

objective, “conscious expressions”8 of reality that

ensures the reproduction of the existent exploitative

result in the existence of a greater societal false

relations of production by the proletariat that in turn

consciousness.

of

guarantee proletarian repression in the succeeding

reification at this aggregate level of consciousness. In

generation. This is not to say that the educational

this manner, ideology becomes a system which

apparatus serves just the purpose of instilling a self-

represents the ideas of the dominant capitalist social

repressive ideology into the proletariat, but rather

group. The social consciousness promoted by

that the educational apparatus injects each class

ideology, however, does not accord with reality, and

with its corresponding ideology: the exploited are

neither encourages the discovery nor the accurate

imbued with an ideology appropriate to their

expression of reality. The concomitant notion that

maintaining an exploited agency, whereas the

arises, that the mere presence of ideology in a class

bourgeois exploiters are instilled with stratagems of

necessarily entails the possession of ideology by that

repression. Having shown that the function of the

class—that ideology is ‘had’ as it were, will be

proletariat is uniquely self-repressive, we can now

detailed later on. For our purposes of establishing

assess how this self-repressive function compares

the function of ideology, however, it is necessary to

with the function of ideology. As we recall, if they are

assert

Ideology

is

an

expression

possess

found to be consistent, then we can conclude that the

transformational abilities on its own. Although

proletariat do indeed ‘have’ ideology; thereby

intellectually and conceptually influential, ideology

proving our thesis.

that

ideology

does

not

is nevertheless a mere set of ideas. In order to effectuate change, it must exist within a State

Next we will examine the uniquely revolutionary

apparatus. The State as we asserted earlier,

quality of the proletariat in becoming aware of their

functions repressively (frequently through force) to

commodified state and how we are from this able to

maintain

reified

distinguish at least three distinct ‘stages’ of

relationship of individuals to their actual conditions

the

representation

of

the

proletarianism. In order to have this potential for

of existence. Ideology then, is functionally expressed

bringing about the visionary ideal of Communism,

through the implement of State—the Ideological

the proletariat must first have the transformative

State Apparatus. Ideology is thus both repressive in

knowledge that they are able to do so. Although this

that it is an expression of reified relations that are in

is a sensible stipulation, the conditions under which

themselves repressive in their conservation of

such knowledge can be attained are troubling. The

exploitation, and in that it functions repressively

proletarian class consciousness is uniquely equipped

through the State apparatus. Ideology, then, as we

to conclude that it is capable of socialising the means

have shown is both intrinsically repressive and

of production and thereby dissolving reification; and

functionally repressive.

with it capitalism. No other class is comparably capable,

Marx

thinks,

because

the

rigorous

Next, the self-repressive function of the proletariat

exploitation of the proletariat also confers upon

must be demonstrated. Although the proletariat are

them a productive discipline and organisation that

certainly exploited and oppressed by their reified

has been lacking in every exploited class hitherto.10

relations of production as we discussed earlier, they

As such, the historical position of the proletariat is

are most unique not just in their historical situation

unprecedented, and according to Marx, they must be

(as inheritors of a revolutionary mantle), but also in

the terminal exploited class. The ideal consciousness

their perpetuation of the repressive capitalist

that the proletariat would achieve, however, that

relations of production. In this manner, the

would allow them the knowledge of their unique

Chuang · 47

historical position, and thus of their transformative

dialectical materialist theories (such as that of

abilities (for one must be aware of one’s potential for

Marx’s) that aide in bringing about a self-aware

freedom, before one begin exercising efforts at its

“anticipatory class consciousness.”12 In this step

attainment), is merely an “imputed” consciousness.11

then, although there will be many structural

The reason for this is that the state of consciousness

similarities to Communism, it will not yet be

where the proletariat come to have the necessary

Communism in that its proletariat consciousness

and transformative comprehension of their unique

will be developmentally incomplete (a partial ‘class

social situation is one that they would possess only

consciousness’ and not the necessary ‘human

under very ideal circumstances (as capitalists

consciousness’). If Communism is the ideal political

effectively oppress through concealment of their

state

oppressions). These ideal circumstances are to be

consciousness—that of ‘human consciousness’, and

found only in a Socialist or Communist historical

we evaluate a political state’s extent of success in

epoch in which concealed, exploitative capitalist

having attained the Communist ideal based on the

institutions

developmental

no

longer

exist.

Correspondingly,

corresponding

state

to

of

an

their

ideal

collective

collective

social

consciousness then ceases to be classed, but rather

consciousness, then we can regard Socialism in this

becomes a ‘human consciousness’. In short, it seems

sense as a ‘weaker’ version of Communism. In this

that the proletariat can only have the necessary

manner, the proletarian achievement of a visionary

knowledge to bring about revolution once revolution

Communist

has been brought about already. The uniquely

successive stages: the incipient capitalist proletariat,

revolutionary nature of the proletariat then, hinges

the subsequent Socialist proletariat, and the final

upon their realisation of a transformative knowledge

Communist ‘proletariat.’ It also becomes evident

of which they can become only theoretically aware. It

here that continued reference to the proletarian

is

correct

group by a designation of “proletariat” grows

consciousness coupled with the ensuing knowledge

increasingly paradoxical: how can we continue to

of their alienation and exploitation by capitalism

denote

that

decreasingly exemplifies proletarian attributes? This

only

through

the

this

proletariat

attainment

may

go

of

about

affecting

the

ideal

progresses

proletariat

as

through

proletarian

three

if

it

revolution. This circular manoeuvre of reasoning is

concern will be addressed later on.

worrying; it seems that the correct consciousness

distinct proletarian stages that we have identified

The three

that would allow the proletariat to apprehend their

based upon our criteria of social consciousness,

exploitation and instigate revolution is an acumen

however, are to act as standards of comparison

that is only achievable in a Communist state.

against which we will assess identity with the ideological identity. Each of these three proletarian

Such an unsound argument is not that which Marx

stages then, will be assessed for the extent to which

advocates. In order to remedy this circularity, Marx

ideology is present in them.

introduces the intermediary state of Socialism that divides

impending

revolution

into

progressive

It

must

be

acknowledged

that

although

the

stages. As a precondition to Communism, the

proletariat in capitalism serve a consistently self-

Socialist state is characterised by the apprehension

repressive function, its functioning in this way is

of the underlying essence in the appearance of

dependent on its continued proletarianism. That is,

capitalist reality. Although the transparency of

in order to function as the proletariat, the proletariat

reified reality will ultimately prompt complete

must continue to instantiate qualities that identify it

revolution—‘complete’ revolution being defined as

as the proletariat. As we have seen, however, the

the final engendering of a class that does not lead to

gradual dissolution of the class system also brings

a new form of exploitation, as well as the presence of

about the demise of the proletarian class form. The

a collective ‘human consciousness’—this is an

likelihood thus arises that with such a seeming

incipient step that precludes complete revolution.

reduction in proletarian cohesion, there follows a

Such non-reified knowledge will be promulgated by

decline in proletarian functionality as well. Although

Chuang · 48

this

complication

indefensibility

might

into

our

appear

to

argument,

introduce it

is

must necessarily consider these contexts. Thus, if the

not

proletarian function is apt to change throughout its

irreconcilable, and will be resolved with forthcoming

developmental process, then it is the consistency of

clarification.

this evolving function that we must assess at each of its main historical stages against the function of

Class in the Marxist sense is characterised by a social

ideology.

order in which members of different classes are entitled to different property rights, and certain

Although

classes are iniquitously forced to forfeit property

function develops commensurately as historical

rights to other classes. The creation of such a social

epochs progress, such a clarification invites a

order will inevitably give rise to exploiting and

particularly damaging objection: if the function of

exploited social

bourgeois and a

the proletariat varies according to each economically

proletarian classes. As the structure of the State

distinct historical epoch, then to the extent that a

advances from a capitalist to a Socialist form then,

social group is identified by its function, would it not

the classed social order it maintains dissolves

be the case that as we approached post-capitalist

accordingly. The reason for this is that the form of

societies (terminating in Communism), there would

the classes is determined largely by its situation

be no proletariat of which to speak? Because it is

within the State just as much as the structure of the

true that the proletariat becomes increasingly less

state depends on the existence of a class structure.

‘proletarian’

As we mentioned earlier, the State initially arises to

approached, it would seem appropriate to object that

arbitrate the irreconcilable interests of an emergent

we cannot evaluate the functional compatibility of

class system but the State ultimately becomes

later proletarian stages with ideology, as there is no

harnessed as an instrument of class rule by the very

characteristically ‘proletarian’ proletariat to be

class system that invited its existence.13 The

analysed. The success of such an argument would

existence of State then, becomes dependent on its

limit our analysis to that of the proletariat in

being instrumentalised by class interests.

groups—the

we’ve

clarified

in

that

nature

as

the

proletarian

Communism

is

This

capitalism, as capitalism would be the only stage of

reciprocity means that one cannot undergo change

economic development in which we could be certain

whilst the other remains unaffected. The function of

of the proletariat existing. Such an analysis would be

the proletariat, then, will vary when such functions

incomplete, as it is unclear that the proletariat do

are determined at each of the distinct stages of

cease to exist in the immediate post-capitalist society

political

to

of Socialism. As such, in order for us to offer a

the

thorough assessment of functional compatibility

proletariat as a self-repressive class during the

between the proletariat and ideology, then we must

capitalist epoch will differ from the function of the

perform

proletariat at a Socialist stage. In spite of such

instantiations

potential discrepancies in function between the

corresponding stage of economic development from

individual proletarian stages, the unifying function

capitalism to Communism (as a proletarian group

of the proletariat as a revolutionary catalyst remains

does not exist in pre-class society). This next section

consistent. Even though the proletariat class may

will be thus spent determining whether a proletarian

cease to be qualitatively proletarian, this does not

group can be said to exist in post-capitalist society.

detract from their overarching function as a catalytic

The means by which we will go about doing so will

social group. Additionally, any analysis of the

involve

proletarian function cannot be abstracted from its

classification test; in this manner, our eventual

corresponding historical contexts. If the proletariat

exclusion of the possibility that the proletariat could

indeed evolve in accordance to the changing political

wholly cease to exist in post-capitalist society, will

contexts in which they are contained, then our thesis

allow us to confirm that some semblance of

of assessing the presence or absence of ideology

proletarian group is inherited by post-capitalist

14

development

Communism).

As

such,

(from the

capitalism function

of

this

a

assessment of

the

procedure

for

all

proletariat

like

that

of

possible at

a

each

binary

Chuang · 49

societies. If we can prove that this is the case, then

an instrument of class rule.16 The State conditions

the objection that we are left without an analysable

the capitalist class system by providing the social

substrate in post-capitalist societies remains salient;

structure in which exploitation can be maintained:

it does however, become invalid.

that of a system of property maintained through legal relations of ownership. In this way, these

Because Marx never quite addresses the state of the

systems of ownership that promote distributive

proletariat in Socialism, we can only make reasoned

iniquities of property engender a capitalist class

inferences by analysing the conditions responsible

system based on exploitation. The capitalist class

for bringing about and maintaining proletarianism

system,

in capitalism. This is to be found in the class system

expression of natural labour divisions that result

of which the proletariat are constitutive. Without a

from biologically differing human aptitudes; it is just

capitalist class system, the proletariat could not

that such an expression in capitalism assumes an

exist. By examining the class system that conditions

exploitative form. When we examine Socialist

the existence of the proletariat then, we can

transformations endured by the State (regarded as a

concomitantly make observations about the success

condition for the capitalist class system) as a means

with which the proletariat persist in post-capitalist

by which to determine how these changes are

societies. We know for instance, that differences in

reflected by the class system, we find that the

biologically conferred capacities result in natural

“withering away of the State” in Socialism predicted

labour divisions that condition the capitalist class

by Engels seems initially to entail the abolishment of

system.15 To the extent that the manifestations of

the class system as well.17 In doing away with the

labour division necessarily correspond to their

conditions originally responsible for bringing about

stages of economic development (such labour

the capitalist class system, it seems intuitive that the

divisions coming to structure a class system in

proletariat class system, and with it, the proletariat,

capitalism),

however,

nevertheless

remains

an

qualitative

will follow in being done away with as well. When we

understanding of the proletariat in Socialism by way

consider, however, that the State acts also as an

of the Socialist expressions of natural labour

instrument of the dominant class, then it becomes

division. How then, do labour divisions instantiate

unclear that the class system disappears with the

themselves in Socialism? Since we know that

dissolution of State. As an instrument of the class

Socialism inherits a transitioned capitalist class

system, the State functions to preserve the capitalist

system, then to understand the macroscopic changes

relations of production conducive to exploiters18—his

in the capitalist class system that result from a

is

Socialist requisition of the class system (and thus the

apparatuses of power and enforcement. Such a

means by which labour division is expressed in

relationship, in which the State is an effect of the

Socialism) we must first apprehend the changes that

capitalist class system, will not allow us to conclude

occur in the underlying mechanisms of the class

that the proletariat cease to exist in Socialism. In lieu

system. In regressing a causal step, we can discover

of the ‘withering’ away of State that accompanies the

how the capitalist class system as a reflection of its

advent of Socialism, the aspects of the class system

underlying mechanisms, is reformed in Socialism by

that cause State could remain even if their effects

virtue of Socialist reformation of its more basic

were dissolved. For instance, if one of the means by

constituents.

which State was harnessed as an instrument of class

we

can

garner

a

rule

performed

was

a

through

judiciary

occasionally

system

that

violent

performed

When we seek then, to discover what is responsible

regulatory functions of society, but that ruled always

for the class system in capitalism, we find the answer

in favour of the capitalists, we can see how doing

to be the institution of capitalist State. From this,

away with this State institution would leave the

there

State’s

underlying class system intact. In determining the

relationship to the class system can be characterised

differences in Socialist and capitalist expressions of

in its: either as a condition of class exploitation, or as

labour division then, we can thereby conclude that

are

two

means

Chuang · 50

by

which

the

the expression of labour divisions inherited by

increasingly classless, the proletariat accordingly

Socialism from capitalism is one that would differ

lose their cohesion resulting from class. Here, the

from the capitalist class system, but nevertheless

additional catalytic function of the proletariat lends

retain certain tendencies of capitalist class. Because

structure and permanency to the proletariat such

the State is as much an effect as well a precursor to

that they are still able to retain a function that

classes, we are able to exclude the possibility that the

persists beyond the dissolution of State, and thereby

class system ceases to exist altogether in Socialism,

retain their cohesion as a group. Although the

even with the certainty that the State will ‘wither

proletariat might cease to be classed in an oppressed

away’. In doing so, we are thus able to further

and exploited sense (with the onset of Socialism),

ascertain that the proletariat do not cease to

and might even cease to be proletariat altogether,

altogether exist either in post-capitalist societies, as

they are still lent a group status by their catalytic

with the persistence of some semblance of the class

function. Such a diminished classed quality does not

system, ensues the persistence of some proletarian

equate to a diminished ability to effectuate catalytic

group.

function, as the two functions that the proletariat effectuate (the classed function being one of self-

Additionally, we can guess that in the economic

repression) exist with functional independence of

progression from

one another. The dually self-repressive and catalytic

capitalism

to

the

projected the

functions of the proletariat then, ensure its survival

proletariat as an exploited class decays accordingly.

as an object of analysis for the purposes of our

In this regard, the objection is correct. However, in

argument in spite of its partial dissolution as a class

order to justify that our thesis, which must pursue

in Socialism. Continued reference to the ‘proletariat’

the functional compatibility of even later proletarian

in the post-capitalist stages of Socialism and

groups with ideology, is valid, we must substantively

Communism then, is something of a misnomer as in

recover the existence of the proletariat in these post-

those instances the proletariat possesses its catalytic

capitalist stages. Thus, although we have proven that

functions, but not the entirety of their self-repressive

the possibility of the proletariat to wholly ceasing to

capitalist function or exploited status. Because we

exist in post-capitalist societies cannot be excluded,

are nevertheless obligated to analyse these post-

it remains to be seen that the proletariat do

capitalism ‘proletarian groups’ in our thesis, for the

positively

post-capitalist

sake of consistency, we will continue to refer to post-

societies. In order to do so, we must find some

capitalism proletarian groups as the ‘proletariat’;

purpose of proletarianism that resists Socialist

with the acknowledgment, however, that the only

transformation, and

proletarian quality that these proletarian retain with

Communist

conclusion,

continue

to

the

exist

cohesion

in

of

hence continues to bind

proletarian group members together. Doing so

certainty is catalysis.

would furnish us the means to prove the persistence of the proletarian group in such post-capitalist

An additional ambiguity in our argument emanates

stages.

from the terminological distinction between the “having” ideology, and a “presence” of ideology. To

To firmly refute the objection that the dissolution of

avoid inconsistency, it will be necessary to resolve

the proletariat leaves us without an analysable

any definitional discrepancies, but we can do so only

substrate this claim, we must now acknowledge the

whilst remaining faithful to the concept of ideology.

dual role of the proletarian as both a class as well as

In examining the nature of ideology, we see

a catalytic group. For we must remember that

straightaway that due to the inevitably dominant

society can be divided into groups due to divergent

quality of ideology, there is no such terminological

interests but it would be misleading to think that

distinction between “having” ideology and an

such groups are immediately classed in the Marxist

ideological “presence”: from a mere presence of

sense without entailing the classed social order that

ideology in the proletariat it will follow that that

makes this possible. When society is rendered

ideology is dominant, and thereby “had” by the

Chuang · 51

proletariat (or more likely impressed upon them).

and ideology then, is one of reciprocity: ideology

The reason for this is a result of the capitalist State’s

finds expression through the State, but the State

relationship with ideology in which ideology is

employs ideology as an implement of repression and

expressed in the form of a State apparatus.

dominance. And insofar as ideology expresses itself through the State as an Ideological Apparatus, it is

The State institution is an authority responsible for

also the ruling ideology. Thus, the mere presence of

reconciling class disputes in capitalism. Arbitration

an ideology as expressed through the State, uniquely

of such inter-class disputes, however, occurs always

ensures its dominance. For the sake of our argument

to the advantage of the bourgeoisie. In this manner,

then, it is acceptable to interchangeably refer to

the State institution entitles the bourgeoisie to

ideology as either being ‘had,’ or being ‘present’ as

different property rights and furthers iniquitous

the same inference of ideological dominance can be

economic

drawn from both.

relations

to

the

detriment

of

the

proletariat. Although the State emerges to fulfil a necessary social role, it is insufficient that it should

In the greater context of a progression toward

merely exist. We’ve mentioned already how it is that

Communism

the State emerged as an authoritative institution, but

discernible stages of proletariat that we can evaluate

not yet accounted for how the State persists in

for functional consistency with ideology: the pre-

capitalism. Certainly the State could have existed as

revolutionary capitalist stage, the intermediary

a one-time arbiter of irreconcilable class disputes,

Socialist stage, and the ideal Communist stage. The

but it has instead persisted and expanded its

function of each of these political stages then, must

influence in the form of constituent political, legal,

be individually assessed for compatibility with the

and philosophical institutions. Although we know

repressive

that the capitalist State preserves the interests of the

consistency, and from that the ‘having’ or ‘not

exploiter class, we have not yet explained that this

having’ of ideology by that proletarian stage

results from the fundamental nature of the capitalist

determined. In the first pre-revolutionary capitalist

State to reproduce the dominant relations of

stage, the proletariat under capitalism possesses a

production.19 The enduring nature of the State

self-repressive function as we have determined

apparatus is thus embedded in the capitalist reality.

already.

The State alone, however, is merely an abstract

imposed, is nevertheless shared with the ideological

concept. In order that it might exert influence, the

function. Ideology is thus present in the capitalist

State must act through its constituent apparatuses;

proletariat, and by virtue of its hegemonic property,

among these, is the Ideological Apparatus. If

also the ruling ideology. As for Socialism, the

ideology then, is articulated through the State as an

presence of ideology is less easily determined in the

apparatus,

Socialist proletarian group, as we cannot be certain

then

it

too

must

be

necessarily

authoritative.

then,

there

ideological

This

are

function

repressive

at

to

function,

least

three

determine

albeit

self-

that with the ‘withering away’ of State, the system of classes is dissolved as well. Because Socialism can

In accounting for the persistence of the State

act as either as a condition of class exploitation, or as

institution then, we have concurrently explained for

an instrument of class rule, we cannot conclude the

the inherent hegemony of ideology: to maintain its

extent to which the proletariat acts-self-repressively

ascendancy, the State must exercise its hegemony

in Socialism. If we attempted to determine the extent

through the Ideological Apparatus. Although the

of ideology in the proletariat by an alternative

State Ideological Apparatus exists in forms of

method, utilising the extent to which the social

religion and family, it finds its most effective

consciousness has been ‘humanised’ to determine

manifestation in education. It is through this

ideological, false consciousness, we would similarly

particular form that the State can effectively

falter. The dissolution of class as we know, is

perpetuate itself through the reproduction of

determinant

productive relations. The relationship between State

consciousness; the complete absence of a class

Chuang · 52

of

the

corresponding

social

system in the Communist ideal, will be reflected in

and Philosophy and Other Essays, p. 136.

its ‘human’ consciousness. In being unable to

New York: Aakar Books, 1971.

ascertain the presence or absence of an exploitative

5.

class system that would in turn determine the

6. Ibid.: 231.

quality of social consciousness at hand, this

7.

alternative method is equally unviable. We can only conclude then, that the extent to which the Socialist proletarian possesses ideology is indeterminate. Lastly, it has been fairly self-intimating throughout our argument that the Communist ideal should be entirely

free

of

any

capitalist

residues.

Correspondingly, the Communist ‘proletarian’ group will be without ideology.

Karl Marx’s Theory of History, p. 231. Marx, Karl. Capital, p. 73. New York: New World Paperbacks, 1967.

8. Ideology and Superstructure in Historical Materialism, p. 103. 9. “Ideology

and

the

Ideological

State

Apparatuses”, p. 145. 10. Karl Marx’s Theory of History, p. 212. 11. Ideology and Superstructure in Historical Materialism, p. 116. 12. Ibid.: 117.

We can thus conclude that ideology is possessed by

13. Man and Society, p. 365.

the pre-revolutionary, capitalist proletariat, exists

14. Ibid.: 364.

indeterminately in the Socialist proletarian stage,

15. Ideology and Superstructure in Historical

and is altogether absent in Communism. This

Materialism, p. 36.

increasing absence of ideology in the proletariat

16. Man and Society, p. 365.

class as it progresses toward achievement of

17. Engels, Frederich. Anti-Dühring, p. 291-

Communism, is due to a dissimilarity in the respective natures of ideology and the proletariat: whereas ideology is conservative of the capitalist reality, the function of the proletariat is also that of a unique revolutionary class. Additionally, we could

292. Moscow: 1935. 18. Wood, Allen. Karl Marx, p. 93. New York: Routledge, 2004. 19. “Ideology

and

the

Ideological

State

Apparatuses”, p. 141.

not merely determine the presence of ideology in the proletariat, as it was evident that the proletariat do not exist in a consistent form, but rather exhibits great qualitative dynamism in the course of its progression toward a Communist ideal. Indeed, because the proletariat is intrinsically catalytic, we must also account for their antecedent capitalist form, as well as their Socialist and Communist manifestations. NOTES 1.

Plamenatz, Jon. Man and Society, Volume II, p. 324. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963.

2. Cohen, Gerald A. Karl Marx’s Theory of History,

p.

35.

Princeton:

Princeton

University Press, 2001. 3. Jakubowski,

Franz.

Ideology

and

Superstructure in Historical Materialism, p. 39. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1990. 4. Althusser,

Louis.

“Ideology

and

the

Ideological State Apparatuses”, in Lenin

Chuang · 53