Who owns 'ideology'?

Who owns 'ideology'?

No-one and everyone.

Photo by Priscilla du Preez on Unsplash

Photo by Priscilla du Preez on Unsplash

First published on Medium

Contrary to what some political journalists, commentators and conservative politicians assert in their various articles and oratory rhetoric, the term ideology does not belong to liberal politics. It's not 'a thing' owned by liberal politicians and their supporters, even though they bandy it around as if it is. The word ideology is pejoratively flavoured, politically designated, by said right-wingers, to the leftists. At the same time, they staked their claim on 'freedom', and have held on to it for decades.

Freedom and ideology are 'heavyweight' words, like liberty, feminism, democracy, religion, economy or taxes. They're born from social changes, and rooted in profound historical events, ambiguous, loved by some, despised by others and, they're generally hard to explain. Moreover, they are used as boxing gloves to spar with an opponent's ideas.

Ideology, as a term, has fuzzy beginnings. 17th century English philosopher, Sir Francis Bacon defined it as, "The working of ideas, that taken together help to legitimate a dominant paradigm". French philosopher Destutt de Tracy added his understanding that ideology is 'a system of beliefs', which we can study to understand how we think, speak and argue. In the 20th century, ideology was studied by Engels and Marx as they sought to understand power and ruling classes leaving it to be associated with communism, which didn't do it any favours.

The capitalists, and their war on communism, relegated ideology to the pile of political mishaps and economic disasters—an excellent framing coup on their part. But socially polarizing; leveraging the capitalist to 'us', those who have the truth, and 'them' those who have an ideology, i.e., the wrong way. But this is incorrect. Ideology is not inherently political. Today, the social sciences understand it to be a shared way of understanding the world, that forms the basis of social practices. Meaning, ideologies are about social beliefs and power.

So, ideology is not a bad word. And ideologies are neither good nor bad perse. Our human world is constructed based on beliefs, not just religious or economic ones, but ones about how we can raise our children, grow our food, or how we think about migrants. Beliefs form the basis of our traditions, and they guide and construct our cultures. For example, the New Zealand No.8 wire attitude is ideological. It's a mentality, which evolved from scarcity and pioneering. We admire this cultural attitude, while in other countries, it's disparaged. That's how beliefs work.

How we talk about ideology matters as much as how we talk about say, rights to free speech or whether or not democracies work. Understanding that beliefs are the basis of social construction; who has the power and why they should, is vital in a functional democracy. In an election period, this heavyweight word gets thrown around carelessly, and we should be wary of anyone, political or not, who uses if to profile themselves as superior. Ideology' is a democratic word, like wearing Nike shoes or drinking a Coke; it's the same for everyone. Take my word for it.

 

The following scholars and their work inform this article:

George Lakoff:  Don't Think of an Elephant

Teun van Dijk:  Ideology and Discourse

Teun van Dijk:  Discourse Studies, Discourse and Ideology

Five benefits of a circular economy for food

In a circular economy, food is produced regeneratively. This improves the overall
health of the local ecosystem, promoting good human health and protecting natural habitats.
— Tansy Robertson-Fall

Addressing climate change and biodiversity loss

By Tansy Robertson-Fall, Senior Editor, Ellen MacArthur Foundation

Climate, biodiversity, human health. These pressing global challenges are all connected by one vital sector of the economy: food. More than a third of the world’s land is currently dedicated to food production. How we manage that land impacts levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, whether plants, insects, and animals can thrive, and if people have access to a nutritious diet.

Read on Medium

Photo by Karsten Wurth on Unsplash

Photo by Karsten Wurth on Unsplash

Plates, pyramids and planet.

Plates, pyramids and planet.

Current food systems jeopardize current and future food production and fail to nourish people adequately. The starting point for this report is the observation – founded on a growing body of research – that if we are to address the multiple social, health and environmental challenges caused by, and affecting food systems, global populations need to move towards dietary patterns that are both healthy and also respectful of environmental limits. As such, an integrated understanding of what such diets look like is needed, as is action to foster the necessary shifts in consumption.

There is increasingly robust evidence to suggest that dietary patterns that have low environmental impacts can also be consistent with good health – that win-wins are possible, if not inevitable. Such dietary patterns represent a substantial improvement on the way people currently eat, a point that is true both in countries where the main problems are those of overconsumption and non-communicable diseases, and in contexts where diets lack diversity and where hunger and underconsumption are of critical concern; one important feature of a sustainable diet is diversity. The broad characteristics of such diets are summarised in Box 1.

article first appeared on Mosaic and is republished here under a Creative Commons licence." class="entry-title-passthrough" target="_blank">And the living is easy

And the living is easy

Oklahoma has lost a million pounds of fat. Ian Birrell meets the mayor who piled on the pounds then launched a healthy living crusade and changed his city’s infrastructure. But can even this defeat our century’s biggest health curse?

Food, health and sustainability: we become what we eat, and so does Earth | The Guardian

Food, health and sustainability

We become what we eat, and so does Earth
By Johan Rockström on The Guardian

ly-le-minh-jF3zJ1EFuNM-unsplash.jpg

We Can Do This!

On September 25th 2015, 193 world leaders will commit to 17 Global Goals to achieve 3 extraordinary things in the next 15 years. End extreme poverty. Fight inequality & injustice. Fix climate change. The Global Goals for sustainable development could get these things done. In all countries. For all people.

Won't You Join Me?

on obesity

Will China have obesity?
Mark Bittman on this subject in The New York Times.

"In the 21st century, it is inevitable that nearly every citizen of the world has been and will continue to be affected by the scourge of junk food and liquid candy. Even though intelligent proposals abound, few countries have attempted to curb their marketing or sales. Without limits, the consumption of unhealthy foods will result in higher rates of obesity, and therefore an increase in associated diseases and premature deaths."

Still you have got to keep in mind, that genes play a large role in obesity as does culture. There is plenty of junk food and liquid candy in other countries where obesity is not as out of control as in America, Australia, UK, NZ et al.  Obesity is a complex societal problem and solutions have not been forthcoming. However there is quite a lot happening at the moment in various scientific fields that may shed some light and offer some solutions. Anyway too much to write in a short blogpost.

 

Cheerfully yours,

Joanna