Ideology is a hollow basis to construct a false narrative.Narrative that is simple but served by propaganda so much so that it appears tobe true. About the ideology and its hollowness, Hitler, Mussolini as well asthe crusader of liberalism – the Americans serve as the best examples. Then thepropaganda, recall, Fritiz Hippler, head of Nazi Germany’s film propagandadivision, said that the secret to effective propaganda is to first simplify acomplex issue and then repeat that simplification over and over again. Yet,most will not recognise this hollowness, they are the failed ideologists. Theones who fail to anticipate the consequences of dealings within the mediatedworld.
To put the argument in perspective, let’s consider the riseof right wing both in India and across the globe. The right wing ideology-etymologically, an idea and its proponents. Almost all will agree on thevalidity and reliability of an idea but it is by means of its proponents thehollowness creeps in. Similar generalisations are to be made when we study thecounter ideologies branded as secular, liberal or shall we say politicallycentre. Centric to this debate is the question, what it takes to be anideologist? Undoubtedly, it is the sincerity to an idea.
Now then, take for example the cases of political switchoverin face and after myth of the recently held parliamentary elections. We haven’tonly been witness to switchovers from the centre to the right and vice versabut ironically from the left to the right as well. So what really brought aboutthese switchovers? The two obvious factors are (a) tickets (b) the politicaltide. Both of them signify an opportunism to take control of the positions ofpower or shall we say self centred actions guided by materialistic thirst. In ascenario as such how will you define an ideology? How can we separate the ideafrom its proponents? As a matter of principle, can a person A be the proponentof the left on Monday and that of the right on Sunday and by the Friday hehappens to be at the centre? Propagating ideology to the masses in the absenceof accountability for the chaos they lead within the society.
So then, should there be a law to check these propagandistsor shall we simply label them switchovers? Ideally, yes but then it will beseen as an infringement of the political rights or freedom that directlycontradicts with the underlying theme of democracies. Does this meansdemocracies are inherently a contradiction with of morality and ethics? Aredemocracies responsible for the chaos prevalent in present social order? Theanswers of these questions are beyond the domain of this article. However, ourfocus is on the immediate problem i.e. the chaotic society, the manipulatedsociety shaped by these ideologies.
So what is the way out? Shouldn’t the burden rest on themasses? Shall we assume the masses are inherently naive and passive in amediated world? Should the masses simply assess the idea or they should more beconcerned by their propagators? These questions are to be investigated by theacademia but for now we must recognise ideology is a hollow basis to constructa false narrative and we must strive to safeguard over selves from beingtrapped again and again.