All countries experience social changes throughout history. As a result, there are certain dominant ideologies and contradictions as social groups develop and gradually institutionalized. America was no exception to dominant ideologies and contradictions long before the period of the Declaration of Independence to present days. This critical essay aims to examine some of the dominant ideologies and contradictions, particularly those related to segregation, slavery, race, social exclusion, and roles people have played beyond these ideologies and contradictions.
The paper draws supporting contents from the works of Ta-Nehisi Coates’ The Case for Reparations, Andrew Jackson’s Transcript of President Andrew Jackson’s Message to Congress ‘On Indian Removal and Thomas Jefferson’s “original Rough draught” of the Declaration of Independence. These materials cover elements that reflect the progress of hegemonic racial ideologies and contradictions that led to racial discrimination and social exclusion and later affirmative action in American society.
Dominant ideology means “the principal ideas, values, and morals in a given society” (Abercrombie and Turner 149). These are values, belief systems, ethics, and opinions, which majorities relate to and share in a given community. Dominant ideologies act as means of social control. It shows and frames thought patterns of majorities in society. Dominant ideologies reflect how dominant groups think about their nature, social status, positions, and roles in society.
These ideologies show specific versions of reality. Nevertheless, there are several other alternative forms of reality. Dominant ideologies, however, might be well entrenched that people might think that they are beyond questioning, human comprehension, and naturally occurring. Still, it is probable for other diverse ideologies to exist in any society. However, such versions of ideologies do not have adequate persuasive power and widespread recognition given to the dominant ideology.
According to Avilés, ideology is “what allows a society to persist, even though the essence of that society may contain contradictions” (Avilés par. 1). This statement highlights the relationship between ideologies and contradictions in society.
The term contradiction refers to “mutually antagonistic tendencies within institutions or the broader society such as those between profit and competition within capitalism” (Elwell par 1). The contradiction is considered absolute. It is present in developmental processes, and there are always opposing tendencies throughout developmental processes in an institution. While values and practices exist to support one another, there are other forms of values and practices, which contradict one another.
America has specific political, social, cultural, and economic developments ever since the periods of British occupation, slavery, and racism to the present time. These relations are intimately connected, and they tend to define dominant ideologies and contradictions in society. Hence, the dominant ideologies in America have been slavery, racism, and social exclusion. Practices of the majorities have often displayed powerful contradictions. These issues have been connected to race and have formed strong social fabric for centuries and thus difficult to break. Nevertheless, the oppressed Americans have struggled to overcome these dominant ideologies.
A critical focus on President Andrew Jackson’s Annual Message to the Congress ‘On Indian Removal’ shows that the dominant ideology at the time was racial segregation and social exclusion. The President noted that the Government at the time steadily pursued a policy on the removal of Indians in areas occupied by white settlers for 39 years (Jackson par. 1). Jackson referred to Indians as savage hunters who occupied land ought to be occupied by the civilized population.
The intention of the segregation was to strengthen states against any possible future attacks. In addition, the removal of Indians was seen as a means of rapid development, population growth, wealth creation, and advancement of power. There was no need for immediate contact between White people and Indians. The removal would allow Indians to pursue their own happiness in their own ways within their own uncouth institutions. It would also gradually ensure the civilization of Indians as they abandon their traditions to civility.
The dominant ideology at the time did not recognize painful experiences associated with separations. For instance, the President asserted that humanity was far from weeping about the painful separations of Indians. Instead, separation would offer joy to white populations as they roam freely and progress without constraints from savages.
At the time, the Government considered its removal policy as generous and liberal toward Indians. Indians were referred to as wandering savages who had no important stronger attachment to their homes relative to white settlers. In this regard, the Government offered to compensate Indians for their resettlement and save them from complete destruction. Obviously, the dominant ideology at the time was widely accepted by white settlers and the Government, but contradictions existed because Indians were considered as uncivilized savages who would not submit to the laws of the States. Moreover, by leaving their ancestral land, Indians were not doing anything that White people had not done when they left their origins for America.
During the reign of President Andrew Jackson, the dominant ideologies were clear and widely embraced toward the savage Indians. However, they had started when Thomas Jefferson declared independence, the dominant ideologies persisted and contradictions emerged in the American society. For instance, the contents of the Declaration of Independence were clear:
“When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for a people to advance from that subordination in which they have hitherto remained, & to assume among the powers of the earth the equal & independent station to which the laws of nature & of nature’s god entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the change……. that all men are created equal & independent ……they derive rights inherent & inalienable among, which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness ….” (Jefferson 423-8).
However, the treatment accorded Indians demonstrated contradictions between the dominant ideologies at the time and the content of the Declaration of Independence.
The case of Thomas Jefferson is interesting for individuals who may wish to understand dominant ideologies and contradictions in American institutions. Hattery and Smith have claimed that Jefferson engaged in abstract justification of freedom and equality in America (Hattery and Smith par. 21). The President felt that these ideologies could have guided the newly born citizens. However, Thomas Jefferson remained silent about the issue of slavery and black emancipation. These were obviously divergent ideologies based on the contents of the Declaration of Independence. As a result, the President created a new dominant ideology that was based on race and human nature. In this new ideology, white people were superior to their black counterparts.
One must recognize the power of the State to develop hegemonic ideologies. At the same time, the State can change existing ideologies to reflect the content of its constitution for consistency and to avoid contradictions. Thomas Jefferson had the power of the State to transform dominant ideologies at the time. Conversely, Jefferson also had the power to develop stronger hegemonic ideologies concerning slavery and the position of Africans in America. Instead, the President did not publicly declare his support or condemnation of slavery as an institution.
While one may recognize that Jefferson had an opportunity to end the institution of slavery, sadly, the President did not do so. The fear of civil war propagated by slavery as a controversial institution could have stopped him. However, later conflicts were based on such issues. From the contradiction created by Jefferson, one may note that the dominant ideology of race emerged stronger and has since then influenced several aspects, beliefs and practices of American society until now.
In fact, race has survived longer than expected in the US. For instance, the inferiority of Africans established during the period of Jefferson was widely expressed during the historic election of the first black president in America. Today, Americans still hold the dominant ideology of white supremacy and inferiority of citizens with African origin.
Coates has argued for the case for reparations for America to be whole. The author noted, “Two hundred fifty years of slavery; Ninety years of Jim Crow; Sixty years of separate but equal; and Thirty-five years of racist housing policy” (Coates par. 1). These are America’s moral debts, which it must reckon with in order to be whole. In other words, American society is full of contradictions amidst dominant ideologies that have developed its historical and current institutions.
The basis of analysis offered by Coates can help critics to understand the unique attributes of Jim Crow racial segregation. In addition, it further strengthens the understanding of ways in which contradictions have been displayed and persisted in America. Coates refers to the periods of 1920s during the reign of Jim Crow as a kleptocracy. This was the period when the mobs lynched and robbed more black people in Mississippi than in any other states (Coates par. 2).
The strategy involved inhibiting black people from voting by attacking them at night. One must note the fundamental concept in these practices. That is, denying black Americans the right to vote and promoting segregation would ensure that they are deeply entrenched into oppressed status and stay as inferior citizens for life. Dominant ideologies ensured that the white supremacy pushed black people further to the margins of society and excluded them from democratic processes.
There are several cases of contradictions in the course of developments of American institutions and history. For instance, Coates highlights the complex race relations in American history and the dominant ideology of racism. The black people could not read, had no lawyers, did not know local courthouse, could not expect the police to be impartial and thus they could not contest the claim and no projection under the law (Coates par. 5). In addition, the authority seized all their belongings. The dominant ideology was ‘separate but equal’, which drove black people to manual labor. One can understand the complex relationship between white and black people, the contradiction in the rule of the land, the contradiction between white property owners and sharecroppers and the concept of ‘separate but equal’.
It is difficult to classify or treat these contradictions and dominant ideologies in a similar manner because they all had their own peculiarity as history progressed and perhaps other liberal ideologies emerged. For instance, black people like Clyde Ross could now attend schools but with extremely little support in Mississippi. Later in the 1960s, black people could buy houses in North Lawndale. This marked the start of new ideologies that supported ‘pilot community for interracial living’ (Coates par. 9). Before this period, many black people in America could not gain access to the legitimate home-mortgage market. That is, there was no financing available for Negroes. The Federal Housing Administration adopted a racial policy that inhibited black people from property ownership.
Social and economic exclusion of black people led to other social challenges, specifically the rise of ghetto communities and crime in America. Contradictions and dominant ideologies are deeply entrenched in American society. Therefore, individual grit cannot overcome them. Still, affirmative action aims to enhance diversity and ensure social inclusion. Coates however points out that affirmative action “only tangentially relates to the specific problems of black people” (Coates par. 33).
According to Coates, liberals have failed to recognize that racism is an active evil with deep foundations in America and not just poverty or inequality. They must recognize the long dominant ideologies and contradictions that have inhibited black people’s success and the entrenchment of such ideologies and contradictions into federal policies. He only sees reparations as the solutions to America’s current challenges.
The paper has critically assessed concepts of dominant ideologies and contradictions in American society by focusing on the Removal of the Indians, the Declaration of Independence and the Case for Reparations. These texts show how segregation, racism, slavery and affirmative action have risen as dominant ideologies and contradictions.
Works Cited
Abercrombie, Nicholas and Bryan S. Turner. “The Dominant Ideology Thesis.” British Journal of Sociology 29.2 (1978): 149–170. Print.
Avilés, Luis A. Ideology: A marxist perspective. n.d. Web.
Coates, Ta-Nehisi. “The Case for Reparations.” The Atlantic. 2014. Web.
Elwell, Frank W. Contradiction. n.d. Web.
Hattery, Angela and Earl Smith. “Cultural contradictions in the South.” The Mississippi Quarterly. 2010. Web.
Jackson, Andrew. “Transcript of President Andrew Jackson’s Message to Congress ‘On Indian Removal’.” Civics Online. 1830. Web.
Jefferson, Thomas. “Jefferson’s “original Rough draught” of the Declaration of Independence.” The Papers of Thomas Jefferson 1. 1760-1776 (1950): 423-8. Web.