Читать книгу Participatory Ideology - Beresford Peter - Страница 10

Introduction

Not everything that is faced can be changed. But nothing can be changed until it is faced.

James Baldwin, 1924–87, writer, poet and activist, quoted in Li, 2020

This book is concerned with ideology, different ideological perspectives, our relationship with them, and how we may change that for the better. It is particularly concerned with political ideologies. These are two words that for many people may be more likely to feel alien and difficult than comfortable and familiar. Yet political ideologies affect all our lives, in many cases very deeply. While we may not realise it, it is difficult for any of us to escape ideologies for even a minute. They may seem like a distant, abstract idea, but they can enter every aspect of our lives, impacting in life and death ways. The big thing about ideologies is that we may not realise we are being influenced by them or even that we have them.

The book’s aims

A key aim in this book, therefore, is to make connections between two ideas which seem to have increasing significance for us all: participation and ideology. While they seem to be closely interrelated and to have major implications for each other, so far efforts to explore the relationship of the two seem to have been limited. The purpose of this book is to change that. Both these concepts are important for politics and public/social policy. However, while some attempt has been made over recent years to look at the ideological underpinnings of public participation (for example, Simmons et al, 2009), the same has not been true of participation in relation to ideology. Yet, as will emerge, this can be seen as a major gap in the discussion of ideology, especially given the massive literature that has developed about it – and the intersecting interest in participation. It is almost as if it has been seen as unproblematic for the ownership of ideology to be narrow and unconsidered.

This lack of attention to participatory approaches to ideology is all the more interesting and surprising given the rising political and policy interest in participation itself. The latter in turn seems to cross over traditional distinctions between left and right of centre politics. Thus, on the one hand, has emerged what has come to be called the Right-wing populism associated, for example, with Donald Trump in the US, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage in the UK, and Viktor Orban in Hungary, although it has become an almost global expression of modern national(ist) politics. On the other hand, we have witnessed rising grassroots pressure for participation from identity, service user, community and other new social movements, pressing for more direct say in society.

While much more attention has been paid to Right-wing populism than grassroots activism, both challenge conventional politics and highlight their limitations and disconnect from the grassroots. However different these two expressions of pressure for participation may seem, both present themselves in terms of groups experiencing exclusion and disempowerment; Right-wing populism in terms of white male blue-collar workers whose political, social and economic power has been eroded, and new social movements in terms of groups identifying as marginalised, facing discrimination and often denied the full rights of citizenship – women, LGBTQ, Black and minority ethnic communities, and disabled people. In both cases people are demanding a greater say in politics and policy and this pressure is creating a commensurate interest in issues of participation.

This book should be seen as a product of such interest. It is offered as a companion volume to It’s Our Lives, which was concerned with supporting people’s involvement and empowerment by valuing their knowledge and experience (Beresford, 2003). This book is similarly concerned with valuing people’s knowledge and experience, but particularly in relation to the issue of ideology. Where the previous text was concerned with exploring participation in relation to research and knowledge production, here the focus is people’s participation in the production and operation of ideology.

Ideology may be a word that many of us don’t feel familiar or comfortable with, but the argument here is that it shapes all our lives. Just as earlier in It’s Our Lives, we found that people’s experiential knowledge seemed to be neglected and devalued in knowledge production, where much more value was attributed to so-called ‘expert’ knowledge, so it seems that people’s lived experience and the knowledge arising from it largely play little if any part in the development of ideology, which nonetheless can massively and intimately affect all of us.

This seems highly problematic, as it means that prevailing ideologies are likely to be outside people’s control, don’t necessarily bear much relationship to their rights, interests and concerns, and ultimately can be used in ways that may be damaging and destructive to them. Different ideological perspectives are often presented as though they reflect and are guided by our rights and needs, but how likely is that to be if we have little say in them? As we shall see, this can go for both ruling ideologies and those that seek to challenge them. Of course, it can’t simply be said that just because you have no say in an ideology it is likely to be bad for you. But what does seem a much more helpful starting point is that an ideology people do have a say in is more likely to be in line with their rights and needs.

The aim here is to develop a different way of thinking about ideology and ideological perspectives and our relationship with them. This starts from the premise that if the aim is to advance an ideological perspective which promotes an empowering society and reflects everyone’s rights and needs, then this is more likely to be achieved if it is done in a participatory way. This builds on my earlier hypothesis in relation to knowledge production. This stated that: ‘The greater the distance between direct experience and its interpretation, then the more likely resulting knowledge is to be inaccurate, unreliable and distorted’ (Beresford, 2003, p 4). This challenged the conventional assumption in positivist research that the opposite was true and that the greater the distance between direct experience and its interpretation, then the more reliable resulting knowledge is likely to be.

The proposition to be explored here is that:

The more people are involved in the production of ideology about how a society should be, then the less it is likely that ideology and the society in which it is located will be oppressive, as opposed to, the more that ideology is imposed on them about how society should be, the more oppressive it is likely to be.

First, though, we have to re-examine the focus of discourse on ideology, which as yet does not seem to have been directed at such issues. In this text, the initial aim is to find out more about conventional discussions of ideology.

The structure of the book

To address its set task, the book is divided into three parts. These focus in turn on ideology, participation and challenging dominant ideologies through participatory action. However, what unifies the book – the thread running through it – is the relationship between ideology and participation. It is a thread that barely seems to have been considered until now. Unless we do so though, how can we fully understand ideology or participation or indeed advance progressive versions of either?

To this end, we begin in Chapter 1 by exploring the conventional discussion of ideology, focusing on political ideology to find out more about its origins and history, as well as the meanings attached to it and key forms it has taken. We familiarise ourselves with the ‘expert’ discourse on the subject and look at the idea itself, how it has been shaped, its association with science and ‘expertise’. Finally, we address the history of ideology and encounter one that is essentially exclusionary rather than participatory.

In Chapter 2 we take the next step and focus on ideology’s relations with ‘us’ – the people on the receiving end. Here the story seems to be one of a widespread lack of both familiarity and ease with the idea. Starting with the individual we explore how ideology impacts on us personally. We consider the idea of people’s personal ideology, the forms it may take and what may shape it. We consider the ideological context of our individual experience, examining two extreme ideologies of the 20th century and the broader insights they offer as case studies.

Chapter 3 develops this discussion by asking if most of us play little part in shaping ideology what does. It does this by exploring the different forces and influences at work shaping our ideological preferences and how they are internalised. We look at the knowledge claims used to justify different ideological positions and how political ideologies serve as means as well as ends. Most important we focus on the ownership of ideology; where does it come from, what say do we have in it? We consider such questions also in relation to ideologies that have emerged to challenge ruling ideologies. Are they different, do we have more say in them? Are there exceptions to the rule?

In Part II of the book we come on to its main focus: reconnecting ideology and participation. We begin to look at a different approach to political ideologies, where the aim is to make possible our effective participation in them. Chapter 4 highlights that this represents a fundamental change in approach to ideology, one that begins with how we try to examine and discuss the concept. A central question is explored: is it possible for ideology to be liberatory unless it is participatory? We look at the insights for such participation to be found in the ‘new social movements’ that developed in the last quarter of the 20th century, including service user movements, and unpack participation considering its history, philosophy, models, contexts and meanings.

Chapter 5 focuses on the barriers that need to be addressed and overcome if such participation is to be inclusive and effective as a basis for a different approach to the development of ideology. The first of these issues to be addressed is power and inequalities of power, then we examine a range of routine exclusions and inequalities that can operate and how these can be challenged. The chapter explores a range of key requirements to ensure inclusive involvement, which include both support for the individual to be involved and improved access to previously excluding social institutions. In the first of two case studies, we see how disabled people got together to develop their own ideology, its key components and the emphasis they have placed on their participation.

In Part III we focus on making participatory ideology real. Chapter 6 moves on from individual involvement to how we can learn to work together to take collective action that maximises our power to bring about change. It continues to explore this from the perspective of disabled people and their movement because of the particular barriers and disempowerment they have successfully challenged and the broader insights this offers. We look at the pressures and circumstances that can operate to make people want to get involved and how we can take the first crucial steps to do this inclusively together, challenging individualisation and the limitations of traditional approaches to collective action.

Chapter 7 develops the discussion about working together by exploring how to have a real say – how we can develop our own organisations, as a basis for self-organisation, rather than merely serving other people’s causes. We look beyond identity politics and the limitations associated with them, to focus on organising on the basis of shared experience, particularly of discrimination and exclusion. This provides a basis for self-organising around common understandings and strongly internalised goals arising from the desire to challenge oppression. We return to the self-organising of disabled people, which has highlighted the difference between traditional processes where non-disabled people controlled the agenda and one where disabled people seek to speak and act on their own behalf, setting up and controlling their own organisations. We see this also through the case study of such a ‘user-led organisation’, Shaping Our Lives, in which the author has been actively involved. Like other self-run organisations, it has done things differently to achieve different objectives, offering helpful insights for advancing participatory ideology in practice.

In order to take forward participatory ideology, we have already had to explore other key concepts, including power and difference. In Chapter 8 we focus on three further ideas and issues that are key for advancing participatory ideology. These are empowerment, language and knowledge, and in this chapter we examine each in more detail. First, though, we focus on theoretical discussion of making social and political change, as this is at the heart of this book’s project.

Then we examine the concept of empowerment, a unique two-part idea for making change, which highlights the need for personal change as a prerequisite for participation in political change. We trace the idea’s origins, its conceptualisation, different meanings, and what works to make it possible. We then look at language and its importance for ideology; how it is used to reinforce inequalities, impose power and manipulate people and how this has been and can be challenged. Finally we investigate knowledge; the role it has long been given to legitimate ruling ideologies, and how revolutionary and new social movements have highlighted and challenged this. We explore the emergence of experiential knowledge as an important part of this challenge and the important role it serves in helping to democratise knowledge and political ideology.

In the concluding Chapter 9, we pull together the arguments and the issues for democratising ideology. Having raised and explored the hypothesis that exclusionary ideology is unlikely to achieve emancipatory goals, we highlight the centrality of people working to achieve more say in society to work for more liberatory societies and a more sustainable planet.

Why ideology should be important to us

Of course, it may be suggested that we can all get along quite well without concerning ourselves with ideology. There are enough things to worry about, without adding to the list! On the other hand, being subject to something that can have massive consequences for your life, that you don’t know much about and have little say in, does not seem a very safe place to be.

We also seem to be living at a time of increasing ideological conflict and extremism. That seems to be happening in terms of the day-to-day ideological threats facing people, as we have seen with large-scale resistance from the Black Lives Matter and #MeToo movements. But we are also seeing this globally, with more economic and military sabre rattling between the West, Russia and China. In the West, there was significant national and international ideological consensus after the Second World War with, for example, the creation of welfare states and the absence of major local conflicts. More recently we have moved far from that situation. Countries like the UK and the US seem to be politically polarised, with a populist Right still powerful but with some strong left of centre parties regaining traction too. There are many sites of war, enormous displacements of populations, and a prevailing neoliberalism that both impoverishes the Global South and exacerbates poverty and inequality in the Global North. Faith-based, tribal and post-colonial conflicts abound. Shifts in power from the colonial West to expansionist China, for example, are reflected in new struggles for rights and resistance like that of the Umbrella movement in Hong Kong. The ending of Soviet dominance in central and eastern Europe has been followed by renewed attacks on Roma, rising anti-Semitism and Islamophobia encouraged by aggressively racist Right-wing groups and administrations.

We can hardly ignore all these threatening signs, linked with large-scale death, destruction, disease and planetary damage. Ideology truly is all our business. Once we begin to think about ideological perspectives, a host of interesting questions come to mind. What does it all mean for us? Where do ideologies come from? Can they be helpful? Each of us is likely to have some personal ideology of our own. But to what extent it is truly ours, or instead something others have given or imposed on us, is another story. Are we the masters and mistresses of ideologies or merely their servants? Our heavily ideological times are undoubtedly damaging for many people. If ideologies are out of control, how might that change? Can we be part of changing it?

These are the kind of issues which this book is concerned with and on which we hope to throw at least some light. Underpinning it is the fear that many millions have already died on the altar of ideological perspectives, and many more might do so. If we are to prevent this continuing to happen, then we must at least try and get a better understanding of such an enormous idea as ideology. A key aim of this publication is to examine the relation between ourselves and ideologies, to help us understand them, particularly political ideologies, as a basis for rethinking and perhaps even changing our response to them. In doing so, it is hoped that it will help us be more aware of the impact ideologies may have on us and how we act and think.

Only then are we really likely to make sense of their influence on us and be in a position to challenge this – if we want to. Here the argument is that ideologies are much too important to be left to ideologues and those who hire and control them. If we don’t give ideologies our attention, others will and already are – and quite probably at our expense.