The objective and subjective functions of ideology

The failure to differentiate between the objective and subjective functions of an ideology frequently results in a misunderstanding of the relation of an ideology to its historical function. At the outset, a dictator’s views are to be understood solely in terms of the economic basis from which they originated. Thus the fascist race theory and nationalistic ideology in general have a concrete relation to the imperialistic aims of a ruling class that is attempting to solve difficulties of an economic nature.

The German and the French nationalism of the First World War appealed to the ‘Greatness of the Nation’, behind which were concealed the economic expansion tendencies of German and French big business. These economic factors do not constitute what is substantial in the corresponding ideology, but only the social soil in which they germinate; in short, they constitute the conditions that are indispensable to the genesis of such ideologies. At times nationalism is not at all socially represented with respect to its substance; nor for that matter can it be brought into line with racial points of view. In Austria-Hungary of former days, nationalism did not coincide with race, but with the ‘homeland’ Austria-Hungary.

In 1914, when Bethmann-Hollweg invoked ‘Teutonism against Slavism’, if he had wanted to be consistent, he would have had to proceed against Austria, this predominantly Slavic state. Thus we see that, while the economic conditions of an ideology give us an insight into its material basis, they offer us no immediate knowledge of its irrational core. It is man’s character structure that directly constitutes this core. Subject to the specific economic conditions of a society, man reproduces the historical economic process in his ideology.

By forming ideologies, man reshapes himself; man’s material core is to be sought in the process by which he forms ideologies. Thus, ideology appears to have a twofold material basis: the economic structure of society and the typical structure of the people who produce it, a structure that is itself determined by the economic structure of society. Thus it is clear that the irrational formation of an ideology also makes man’s structure irrational.

The structure of fascism is characterized by metaphysical thinking, unorthodox faith, obsession with abstract ethical ideals, and belief in the divine predestination of the fuhrer. These basic features are linked with a deeper layer, which is characterized by a strong authoritarian tie to the fuhrer-ideal or the nation. The belief in a ‘master race’ became the principal mainspring of the tie to the ‘fuhrer’ on the part of the National Socialist masses, as well as the foundation of their voluntary acceptance of slavish submission. In addition to this, however, the intensive identification with the fuhrer had a decisive effect, for it concealed one’s real status as an insignificant member of the masses.

Notwithstanding his vassalage, every National Socialist felt himself to be a ‘little Hitler’. Now, however, we want to turn our attention to the charactero-logical basis of these attitudes. We must seek out the dynamic functions that, while they themselves are determined by education and the social atmosphere as a whole, remould human structures to such an extent that tendencies of a reactionary-irrational nature are capable of taking shape in them; to such an extent that, completely enveloped in their identification with the ‘fuhrer’, the masses are immune to the insult heaped upon them by the label ‘inferior’.

If we shut our eyes to the dazzling effect of ideologic phraseology, if we focus our attention on its irrational content, and if we know how to show its proper bearing upon the sex-economic aspects of the process of ideologic formation, then the stereotype equating of ‘racial poisoning’ and ‘blood poisoning’ is immediately conspicuous. What does this mean?