Abstract
The article discusses the methodological issues involved in using the concept of “ideology”, which arise from its complex character. “Ideology” cannot be easily reduced to one single meaning, as far as it bears trails of multiple (and sometimes opposite) meanings that it had got through its long intellectual history. As a result, this concept has a common semantic kernel and varying periphery. While using this concept, one needs not only to stick firmly on the selected definition, but also to be aware about the theoretical debates that shaped this particular configuration of meanings. The article argues that the definition of ideology as “a system of ideas”, that was proposed by A.V. Rubtsov, is insufficient to address the major theoretical junctions of interpreting ideology. In particular, it does not take into account the social and political functions of ideology and exaggerates its systemic characteristics. The article supports Rubtsov’s idea of differentiating ideology as a system of ideas and as a body of institutions and proposes an alternative concept, that also focuses on the ways ideas function in social contexts characterized by relationships of power and inequality, but is not that much loaded with contradictory meanings – the concept of symbolic politics.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
