Marxist theory requires holding both relative autonomy and economic determinacy at once

Evidence

Whether or not we try to develop an adequate Marxist theory of ideology from this point, it seems to be the case that the problem of ideology presents us with a paradigm instance of Marxist theory as such , what Althusser has called the necessity—and the difficulty—of holding on to “both ends of the chain” at once: the relative autonomy of a region (e.g., ideology) and its “determination in the last instance” (i.e., the determinacy of ideology by other instances, and, in the last instance, by the economic). It is the necessity to hold fast to the latter protocol which has, from time to time, sanctioned a tendency to collapse the levels of a special formation—especially, to collapse “ideas” or ideology into “the base” (narrowly defined as “the economic”). On the other hand, it is the requirement to explore the difficult terrain of “relative autonomy” (of ideology) which has given the field of ideology its awkward openness. It is through this gap—to borrow a recent metaphor of Althusser’s—that the “pup” of semiology continues to “slip between the legs” of a Marxist theory of ideology. — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 371

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Defines the core Althusserian tension between relative autonomy and ‘determination in the last instance’ that frames Hall’s whole approach to ideology.
  • XREF: Connects to Gramsci’s hegemony and to Hall’s later work on Thatcherism and ‘authoritarian populism’ where this framework gets applied. — connects to: Marxism conceives society as overdetermined relatively autonomous levels, not a simple unity; Marxism is not economic reductionism and requires attending to ideas in their own terms; Marx reaffirmed economic determination was universal across all epochs including feudal and antique ones (+27 more)
  • corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 371

Broader Connections