Treating ideology seriously in its own terms strengthens rather than dilutes Marxist analysis

Evidence

It could even be argued that it was Hill’s decision to treat the religious, ideological, and intellectual dimensions of the “English Revolution” seriously in their own terms—and not simply as a simple reflection of economic forces—which saved his work from its earlier tendency to economic reductionism: saved it, that is, not from but for Marxism. (Marxism is not an economic reductionism, although in the period of the Second International Weber could be forgiven for sometimes thinking that it was.) — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 335

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: The inversion ‘saved not from but for Marxism’ reframes attention to ideas as a requirement of proper Marxist ideology theory rather than a concession to idealism — a subtle and load-bearing point.
• XREF: Directly connects to Hall’s later theoretical work on articulation and the relative autonomy of the superstructure. — connects to: Marxist theorists disagreed over dating ideology shifts but shared base-superstructure premises — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 130; Fromm saw psychoanalysis as filling Marxism’s missing link between ideology and economic base. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 329; Marxist cultural criticism must be class struggle waged within theory itself — Fredric Jameson, The Political Unconscious, 115 (+3 more)