Research On Louis Althusser’s Ideology Theory In The Perspective Of Reproduction

Althusser’s ideology theory in the perspective of reproduction undoubtedly occupies a key position in the genealogy of the whole ideology criticism theory. In a certain sense, it is critical for us to understand the ideology criticism of Marx and the contemporary theory. As we know, Althusser began to pay attention to ideology theory very early. But an important fact is that he mainly emphasized the distinction between ideology and science in order to defend the scientific theory of Marx from the angle of new epistemology in the early 1960s. However, a major change is the "Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses", which was published in 1970. In the specific historical background, Althusser no longer emphasized the distinction between ideology and science, but rethought the Marxist state theory and ideology theory from the perspective of social reproduction. As a result, he put forward the theory of Ideological State Apparatuses and ideology of microscopic construction.In general, this paper mainly discusses the following three aspects. Firstly, excavating the historical background of Althusser’s ideology theory in the perspective of reproduction with the social and historical situations around 1970s worldwide, especially the development of capitalism in Western Europe after the war and the "May storm" campaign (1968) in France. Secondly, standing on "Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses", and making a comprehensive analysis of ideology theory in the perspective of social reproduction by the method of text interpretation. In addition to this, clarifying the intrinsic relationship between the two parts of the text by summing up the changes of Althusser’s thought before and after. Finally, clearly illuminating the academic value and limitations of Althusser’s ideology theory in the perspective of reproduction based on the theory of reproduction and ideology criticism of Marx as a reference. At this point, the central issue of Althusser is that the bourgeoisie is how to maintain its own rule and has "long-term stability" in the capitalist society. He firstly recognized the social nature of the reproduction process from the perspective of social reproduction, and affirmed the core position of labor reproduction at the same time. Through "symptomatic reading" the traditional Marxist state theory, he proposed to distinguish between the State Power and the State Apparatuses. Then he found that besides the traditional State Apparatuses by pure violence, there also exist many hidden but more profound Ideological State Apparatuses. With the further research, Althusser identified that the Ideology State Apparatuses take the core position in the reproduction of the whole capitalist society and the existent immortal ideology "Interpellates" individuals as subjects through the interpellation mechanism.Objectively speaking, "Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses" not only enriches the understanding of the "subject", but also broadens the research scope of the traditional state theory of Marxism. At the same time, it also has explosive impacts on the contemporary left radical political philosophy in the western, which has become the theoretical basis of the contemporary political philosophy, ideology theory and cultural criticism. However, it must be pointed out that, Althusser’s ideology theory in the perspective of reproduction has its inherent limitations. The most fundamental problem lies in the narrow sight of the study, which abandoned the object dimension and only concerned about the pure "subject". As a reference, Marx’s critique of fetishism is closely together with his ideology theory. When Marx got the scientific Historical Materialism, he advanced the logic level of his critic in the process of the depth analysis of capitalist mode of production. He takes the fetishism not only as the inevitable process of social history, but also as the contradiction movement of the reveals history of fetishism development way. Many contemporary western left-wing scholars are trapped in the discussion of ideology because they are detached from the realities of social history and have ignored the real meaning of Marx’s critique of fetishism.