Interpretive Framework For Ideology

1855 Words4 Pages

At the outset, in terms of competing ideologies and why there is not one consistent world view for everyone, Rory Varrato perhaps best explains this, saying ‘Often, though, holders of an ideology believe that they have the whole truth rather than a partial truth; they assume that their ideological lens is clear, correct, and complete (or they don’t even realize that they have a lens), and they think that others’ lenses are varying shades of wrong. This fact, in a nutshell, is the source of all political conflict, as holders of different ideologies clash over their seemingly incompatible views of the world and how it ought to be.’ (Varrato) An Interpretive Framework for Ideology It is a fact that ideas have consequences, sometimes dire consequences, …show more content…

He believed that the revolutionaries’ concept of freedom was wrong - that freedom in and of itself was not right or wrong but the application of it, particularly if used with (voluntary) restraint. He thought that there was a continued ‘social contract’ within society that exists in both the past and present, and will continue into the future: ‘Society is indeed a contract…As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained in many generations, it becomes a partnership not only between those who are living, but between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born.’ (Burke 80) and that to ‘preserve this partnership, Burke believed that both government and longstanding customs and traditions are indispensable.’ (Ball, Dagger, and O’Neill 102) and so he espoused a view of human imperfection, the fact of inequality across society and the provision of freedom and order within the existing social system of society. As outlined in the opening sentence on Conservatism, there are many facets to this ideology with the discussion on Burke’s influence being just one, and mentioned by Ball in modern times has become a ‘house divided’ but ‘the different kinds of conservatives coexist in uneasy tension with one another’. (Ball, Dagger, and O’Neill 118,

Open Document