Identity By Ideology

[PureX]

I have been puzzling, lately, over the modern (mostly) American phenomenon of intertwining self-identity with ideology. I'm referring to the steady and significant increase in the number of Americans who conflate their own identity with some particular ideology, both on a personal level and in groups.

Fifty years ago, very few Americans would have thought of themselves as being republican or democrat, liberal or conservative, religious or agnostic, capitalist or socialist, pro or anti abortion, pro or anti contraception, pro or anti gay rights, pro or anti taxation, pro or anti climate change and carbon emission control, pro or anti government regulation, and so on. Certainly people had opinions about these issues, and tended to come down on one side of them or another, but people didn't consider the ideologies that led them to their opinions on these issues to be the defining factor in 'who they are'. And yet now days that seems to have become surprisingly commonplace.

I hear songs on the radio all the time about how proud the country bumpkin is to be a country bumpkin. Clearly, it's the greatest thing about the singer's life. And I hear songs about how bad the bad-boy rapper is and how he wants us all to know how bad he is. Because clearly, his anti-social, even criminal badness is paramount to his view of himself. And on the religious stations I hear songs and stories about how righteous the Bible Christians are and how we'd all better become one or we're going to hell. Or I can switch to talk radio and hear hours upon hours devoted to expressing how "our" ideology is always right, and "their" ideology is always wrong. How "we" who adhere to this ideology are the good guys, while "they" who adhere to that ideology are the bad guys. And listeners devote many hours of their lives listening to this constant ideological and personal identity reinforcement.

But why?

Why have we Americans become so caught up in identifying ourselves with ideology? We used to identify ourselves through our accomplishments. We were farmers, or ranchers, or steelworkers. We were fathers, homemakers, doctors and priests. We were athletes and cops. Why has this changed, do you think? I'm puzzled about it.

And I'm concerned about it, too. Because as we become more and more self-identified with ideology, we become less and less self-identified through our collective humanity. And as a result we are becoming more and more divided against each other by our ideological differences. Differences that we would not be tripping over if we were identifying ourselves and each other as human beings, first, rather than as ideological manifestations. Especially if we saw ourselves and each other as accomplished human beings. Human beings who have done things with their time and energy that benefit society: farmers, ranchers, industrial workers, athletes, priests, teachers, and cops, etc.,. It seems to me that we would be far more likely to respect and appreciate each other if this is how we thought of people, instead of as liberals, conservatives, gays, atheists, democrats, republicans, or whatever.

Any thoughts?

 

[resodko]

I have been puzzling, lately, over the modern (mostly) American phenomenon of intertwining self-identity with ideology.

Any thoughts?

ever think about getting a real job?

 

[Nick M]

Fifty years ago, very few Americans would have thought of themselves as being republican or democrat, liberal or conservative, religious or agnostic, capitalist or socialist, pro or anti abortion, pro or anti contraception, pro or anti gay rights, pro or anti taxation, pro or anti climate change and carbon emission control, pro or anti government regulation, and so on.

Any thoughts?

I only identify myself to show my opposition to you, the left, and wrong. So back then, the heathen was still in hiding but being very subtil.

 

[rocketman]

I have been puzzling, lately, over the modern (mostly) American phenomenon of intertwining self-identity with ideology. I'm referring to the steady and significant increase in the number of Americans who conflate their own identity with some particular ideology, both on a personal level and in groups.

Fifty years ago, very few Americans would have thought of themselves as being republican or democrat, liberal or conservative, religious or agnostic, capitalist or socialist, pro or anti abortion, pro or anti contraception, pro or anti gay rights, pro or anti taxation, pro or anti climate change and carbon emission control, pro or anti government regulation, and so on. Certainly people had opinions about these issues, and tended to come down on one side of them or another, but people didn't consider the ideologies that led them to their opinions on these issues to be the defining factor in 'who they are'. And yet now days that seems to have become surprisingly commonplace.

I hear songs on the radio all the time about how proud the country bumpkin is to be a country bumpkin. Clearly, it's the greatest thing about the singer's life. And I hear songs about how bad the bad-boy rapper is and how he wants us all to know how bad he is. Because clearly, his anti-social, even criminal badness is paramount to his view of himself. And on the religious stations I hear songs and stories about how righteous the Bible Christians are and how we'd all better become one or we're going to hell. Or I can switch to talk radio and hear hours upon hours devoted to expressing how "our" ideology is always right, and "their" ideology is always wrong. How "we" who adhere to this ideology are the good guys, while "they" who adhere to that ideology are the bad guys. And listeners devote many hours of their lives listening to this constant ideological and personal identity reinforcement.

But why?

Why have we Americans become so caught up in identifying ourselves with ideology? We used to identify ourselves through our accomplishments. We were farmers, or ranchers, or steelworkers. We were fathers, homemakers, doctors and priests. We were athletes and cops. Why has this changed, do you think? I'm puzzled about it.

And I'm concerned about it, too. Because as we become more and more self-identified with ideology, we become less and less self-identified through our collective humanity. And as a result we are becoming more and more divided against each other by our ideological differences. Differences that we would not be tripping over if we were identifying ourselves and each other as human beings, first, rather than as ideological manifestations. Especially if we saw ourselves and each other as accomplished human beings. Human beings who have done things with their time and energy that benefit society: farmers, ranchers, industrial workers, athletes, priests, teachers, and cops, etc.,. It seems to me that we would be far more likely to respect and appreciate each other if this is how we thought of people, instead of as liberals, conservatives, gays, atheists, democrats, republicans, or whatever.

Any thoughts?

Yes, I have one thought on the matter. What makes you think people were not separated by ideology in years past? Either you are too young to know, or have completely ignored history, just possibly you may want to see things as the "good ole days" . People have always been swayed one way or another by cultural & ideological differences it is only a high minded platitude to think that people will ever all be on the same ideological page. Your dream of nirvana or utopia amongst mankind is just a fantasy, it never has existed, and never will.

 

[PureX]

Yes, I have one thought on the matter. What makes you think people were not separated by ideology in years past? Either you are too young to know, or have completely ignored history, just possibly you may want to see things as the "good ole days" . People have always been swayed one way or another by cultural & ideological differences it is only a high minded platitude to think that people will ever all be on the same ideological page. Your dream of nirvana or utopia amongst mankind is just a fantasy, it never has existed, and never will.

I was born in the 1950s. So I lived through the '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s, and 15 years into this century. And even in the '60s, which are generally considered to be a very "idealistic" time, people didn't define themselves, ideologically, to the degree that many do, today. They may have believed passionately in some ideological positions, especially about the Viet Nam war, and equal rights, but they didn't become the psychological embodiment of those issues the way so many people do, today. And by the end of the '70s, that idealism had pretty much died as the hippies that were part of it all had to get jobs, start families, and worry about supporting themselves.

And anyway, what I'm talking about isn't idealism, it's a kind of cult of ideology. Wherein people become the representations of whatever ideology they've chosen as their identity 'badge'.

 

[rocketman]

I was born in the 1950s. So I lived through the '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s, and 15 years into this century. And even in the '60s, which are generally considered to be a very "idealistic" time, people didn't define themselves, ideologically, to the degree that many do, today.

Now I will agree with this, I believe that ideological identification is much more intense & polarizing than it has ever been but, make no mistake the differences have always existed.

They may have believed passionately in some ideological positions, especially about the Viet Nam war, and equal rights, but they didn't become the psychological embodiment of those issues the way so many people do, today. And by the end of the '70s, that idealism had pretty much died as the hippies that were part of it all had to get jobs, start families, and worry about supporting themselves.

Now you see here, you are only relating to the time you know and identify with, not the time you are not as familiar with. Take the birth of this country for instance, do you believe that the colonists were not polarized by ideology to either serving the crown or revolting against it? Many colonists were loyal to the king during this time, people have always been opposing one another for one reason or another but, it is easy to look at the span of your existence & see the changes, conflict & opposing ideologies are part of the human condition. Today with instant media all around us it is just more intense.

And anyway, what I'm talking about isn't idealism, it's a kind of cult of ideology. Wherein people become the representations of whatever ideology they've chosen as their identity 'badge'.

And they always have...you are just more sensitive to the intensity of it via technology, something that was absent in the past.

 

[PureX]

Now I will agree with this, I believe that ideological identification is much more intense & polarizing than it has ever been but, make no mistake the differences have always existed.

Now you see here, you are only relating to the time you know and identify with, not the time you are not as familiar with. Take the birth of this country for instance, do you believe that the colonists were not polarized by ideology to either serving the crown or revolting against it? Many colonists were loyal to the king during this time, people have always been opposing one another for one reason or another but, it is easy to look at the span of your existence & see the changes, conflict & opposing ideologies are part of the human condition. Today with instant media all around us it is just more intense.

And they always have...you are just more sensitive to the intensity of it via technology, something that was absent in the past.

It's hard to say how ideological Americans were in the past. I'm not claiming it's never happened before. Though I will say that ideology is the luxury of the well off. People who are struggling to survive don't have the luxury of being that ideological. What I'm saying is that in the 57 years I've been alive, I have not seen people in this country define themselves in this way to the degree that they seem to be doing, today. And what's more, I see great harm in it. Which is something I would't have expected. It turns out that ideology both divides us and ignites our passions, which tends to destroy peaceful societies.

Historically, the precedent for it would be Eastern Europe just before and during WW1. When the larger towns and cities were all hotbeds of communists, socialists, capitalists, anarchists, aristocrats, atheists, and whatever, all arguing and bickering over their own superior opinions of themselves.

 

[chrysostom]

I don't really identify with the republicans
I vote republican
because
it is the only alternative to the democrats
who
kill babies

 

[csuguy]

First off, I highly doubt there is any difference between man's relationship with ideology today vs. the past. We might concern ourselves with different ideologies, but its always been there. The concept of America and being an American (vs, say, Communism) was a very strong ideology a couple generations ago.

I see no problem with identifying oneself with what one believes and values. To the contrary - what else should one identify themselves with except that which is important and defining to an individual? That's not to say all ideologies are good, and we should attempt to point out the errors of the bad one's - but if you won someone over from a bad ideology they would merely switch to another one.

Or, if not some form of ideology, how would you have people define themselves?

 

[Daniel1611]

I think it's bizarre how people call themselves "liberal" or "conservative" then take the party line on every issue. I don't get it. I make judgments issue by issue. Gun rights, I'm conservative. The Drug War, I'm liberal. And so forth. I can't understand just taking the liberal or conservative position on every issue just because. People like to form gangs and have an enemy I guess.

 

[rocketman]

It's hard to say how ideological Americans were in the past. I'm not claiming it's never happened before. Though I will say that ideology is the luxury of the well off. People who are struggling to survive don't have the luxury of being that ideological.

That is a load of crap right there...all people have a world view and an ideological belief set to go with it, saying it has to do with their social status or financial station in life is absurd, or at least the notion that the lack of money equals no ideological viewpoint is absurd. This statement is more of an emotional appeal than reality.

What I'm saying is that in the 57 years I've been alive, I have not seen people in this country define themselves in this way to the degree that they seem to be doing, today. And what's more, I see great harm in it. Which is something I would't have expected. It turns out that ideology both divides us and ignites our passions, which tends to destroy peaceful societies.

When has any society ever been peaceful? Please show me...it makes for a good fantasy novel but, is completely non-existant anywhere amongst mankind and judging from history alone it never has existed. Like I said before, the only reason that the ideologies are so much more apparent & noticeable today than in the past is the advent of instant media from every direction.

Historically, the precedent for it would be Eastern Europe just before and during WW1. When the larger towns and cities were all hotbeds of communists, socialists, capitalists, anarchists, aristocrats, atheists, and whatever, all arguing and bickering over their own superior opinions of themselves.

I am sure that you can find the same in varying degrees throughout history. Funny you should spotlight it so well, because our urban areas have turned into the same filthy soup you have presented here but, they have never bickered over superior opinions of themselves, they have bickered of the superiority of one worldview over another, and so it goes...sounds like war is in the air again eh? There will be no peace until the Prince Of Peace returns.

 

[rocketman]

I think it's bizarre how people call themselves "liberal" or "conservative" then take the party line on every issue. I don't get it. I make judgments issue by issue. Gun rights, I'm conservative. The Drug War, I'm liberal. And so forth. I can't understand just taking the liberal or conservative position on every issue just because. People like to form gangs and have an enemy I guess.

You just did though...formed a liberal or conservative position on two separate issues and I think most informed people do. It is the totality of what one group stands for or opposes where the ideological lines are drawn. I personally don't agree with every conservative on every issue but, I do agree on the majority of conservatives and their platform. You can only go issue by issue when deciding on an individual candidate to represent you but, when drawing an ideological line where you stand one must look at what the group stands for in total, good & bad, and make a decision. No man is an island and formation of groups/gangs are also part of the human condition

 

[rocketman]

First off, I highly doubt there is any difference between man's relationship with ideology today vs. the past. We might concern ourselves with different ideologies, but its always been there. The concept of America and being an American (vs, say, Communism) was a very strong ideology a couple generations ago.

Exactly!

I see no problem with identifying oneself with what one believes and values. To the contrary - what else should one identify themselves with except that which is important and defining to an individual? That's not to say all ideologies are good, and we should attempt to point out the errors of the bad one's - but if you won someone over from a bad ideology they would merely switch to another one.

Very true...everyone believes in something.

Or, if not some form of ideology, how would you have people define themselves?

Good post!

 

[PureX]

First off, I highly doubt there is any difference between man's relationship with ideology today vs. the past. We might concern ourselves with different ideologies, but its always been there. The concept of America and being an American (vs, say, Communism) was a very strong ideology a couple generations ago.

Actually, no, it wasn't.

Prior to and during WW1, other parts of the world (namely eastern europe) were caught up in a battle of ideologies, mostly political, but here in the U.S. we were mostly uninterested in any of that. We had a few ideological rabble-rousers of our own (communists and racial purists) but they never gained much traction among the masses.

We didn't enter into the world wars for ideology, either. We did it mostly for the defense of ourselves and of our allies. They were defensive wars, not ideological campaigns. And by the time WW2 ended, we had become more unified as a people than at any other time in our history. We taxed the rich (and they didn't complain), we helped the poor, sick, and old. We worked hard, and together, and we created the wealthiest, healthiest, most educated, law-abiding, and contented nation in history.

But with all that luxury and freedom came the luxury of idealism and the decadence of the 'baby boom' generation. Yet even they didn't become the hard core ideologues that we see so many of our fellow citizens becoming, today.

I see no problem with identifying oneself with what one believes and values.

I see a lot of problems with it. Both historically, and currently.

Ideologues who conflate their own identity with their ideologies have a great tendency to become confused in their reactions to disagreement and criticism. Because they have conflated themselves (and their egos) with their ideology, they take an attack on their ideology as an attack on them, personally. They take people who disagree with their ideology as their 'personal enemies', and as a result they way over-react in the form and intensity of their defensiveness. It was exactly this kind of personalized ideological over-reaction that started WW1 in Eastern Europe. And it's exactly this same kind of personalized ideological over-reaction that fueled the attack on the U.S. on 9/11.

People who cannot recognize the difference between a personal attack and an ideological disagreement tend to react to ideological disagreements personally, and often even violently, because they feel as if their own person is being attacked.

To the contrary - what else should one identify themselves with except that which is important and defining to an individual?

Or, if not some form of ideology, how would you have people define themselves?

When I was growing up, people tended to identify themselves relative to what they did in life, not what they believed ideologically. My dad thought of himself as a truck driver, a husband, and a father. And he was proud of being all those things. And as such, he felt like a contributing member of his community, which was made up of other similar contributing members. He didn't see himself as being at war with his own government, or his fellow citizens, or anyone, because he wasn't an ideologue. He didn't believe that his personal identity was being attacked every time someone disagreed with his personal ideology.

It's not that my dad didn't believe in certain ideals. He did. But his ideology didn't define him. And didn't define the way he viewed or interacted with other people. Instead, he viewed others as being much like himself: men and women who were all contributing as he was to the general well-being of his community. But that's because my dad grew up through WW2. He was too young to fight, (he fought in Korea,) but he learned the lesson of national and civil unity that all those people who lived through the war years learned.

They were, I believe, America's greatest generation. And part of their greatness was in their sense of unity of purpose, as American citizens. The 'lone ideologues' of today have thrown that sense of national and civil unity right out the window, because they can't tolerate anyone who dares to disagree with them. They have become nations unto themselves, and are thus dividing the actual nation into endless 'enemy factions'.

 

[PureX]

I think it's bizarre how people call themselves "liberal" or "conservative" then take the party line on every issue. I don't get it. I make judgments issue by issue. Gun rights, I'm conservative. The Drug War, I'm liberal. And so forth. I can't understand just taking the liberal or conservative position on every issue just because. People like to form gangs and have an enemy I guess.

I hear you!

And it's not just the 'party line' mentality, it's the idea that because one is a conservative, all liberals become their enemy (or vise versa). Or just because one identifies as a Christian, all non-Christians become the antichrist. It's the blinding extremism of it that is so insane, and so harmful.

 

[Quincy]

I'd say the increase in the news media's reach due to the 24/7 news cycle has been the biggest player in this. People are divided over ideology because they witness people on TV argue and belittle each other over labels. Every single segment of a newscast is full of labels where one group demonizes the other in a game for the biggest ratings. How do you create enough content for a 24/7 news channel? You flame the ratings war, which incites and brainwashes people into fighting a cultural war.

In the end, it's not as bad as it seems. The media makes it out to be bad. Like you said, most people are not privileged enough (or have the time) to concern themselves about various types of ideology. Once you get out into the many communities in the country, you'll find more people who, as the song says, are all just drunk Americans.

 

[patrick jane]

I'd say the increase in the news media's reach due to the 24/7 news cycle has been the biggest player in this. People are divided over ideology because they witness people on TV argue and belittle each other over labels. Every single segment of a newscast is full of labels where one group demonizes the other in a game for the biggest ratings. How do you create enough content for a 24/7 news channel? You flame the ratings war, which incites and brainwashes people into fighting a cultural war.

In the end, it's not as bad as it seems. The media makes it out to be bad. Like you said, most people are not privileged enough (or have the time) to concern themselves about various types of ideology. Once you get out into the many communities in the country, you'll find more people who, as the song says, are all just drunk Americans.

you're right. i'm just over yonder in missouri. we know reality - :cow:

 

[serpentdove]

"I have been puzzling, lately, over the modern (mostly) American phenomenon of intertwining self-identity with ideology."

We don't check our Christianity at the door.

Recommended Reading:

Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity by Nancy Pearcey

"I'm referring to the steady and significant increase in the number of Americans who conflate their own identity with some particular ideology, both on a personal level and in groups.

Fifty years ago, very few Americans would have thought of themselves as being republican or democrat, liberal or conservative, religious or agnostic, capitalist or socialist, pro or anti abortion, pro or anti contraception, pro or anti gay rights, pro or anti taxation, pro or anti climate change and carbon emission control, pro or anti government regulation, and so on. Certainly people had opinions about these issues, and tended to come down on one side of them or another, but people didn't consider the ideologies that led them to their opinions on these issues to be the defining factor in 'who they are'. And yet now days that seems to have become surprisingly commonplace."

"Some people believe Christianity is like checking a box Democrat or Republican....Can we say if you do not follow Christ you are not a Christ-follower?--A Christian." ~ Darrell Ferguson Mt 12:50

See:

AOG Study Notes

http://www.vananne.com/revivalforsurvival/aog 9 jul 2007_doc.pdf

Ruth was a country bumpkin (Ru 1:4).

"Clearly, it's the greatest thing about the singer's life. And I hear songs about how bad the bad-boy rapper is and how he wants us all to know how bad he is. Because clearly, his anti-social, even criminal badness is paramount to his view of himself."

How bad he is :idunno: How badly he wants to make money

"And on the religious stations I hear songs and stories about how righteous the Bible Christians are and how we'd all better become one or we're going to hell."

Trust in Jesus - Third Day

"Or I can switch to talk radio and hear hours upon hours devoted to expressing how "our" ideology is always right, and "their" ideology is always wrong."

Eccl 10:2, Jn 10:10

"How "we" who adhere to this ideology are the good guys, while "they" who adhere to that ideology are the bad guys."

Ro 1:16

"...[W]e are becoming more and more divided against each other by our ideological differences. Differences that we would not be tripping over if we were identifying ourselves and each other as human beings, first, rather than as ideological manifestations."

Are you a utopian? Lk 12:51. At the end, there will be a falling away (Mt 24:12). People are lining up on one side or the other. Be sure :straight: you're :burnlib: on the right side. Josh 24:15

 

[rocketman]

We didn't enter into the world wars for ideology, either. We did it mostly for the defense of ourselves and of our allies. They were defensive wars, not ideological campaigns.

Defensive for us (the U.S.) maybe but, make no mistake Hitler was posing an ideology as was Stalin, and Tojo so, in a sense it was ideological from the standpoint that we were repelling/defending ourselves from an ideology that we were not willing to concede to by force. It seems your view of ideologies is rather tunnel visioned purex, or at least you are wearing blinders to the entire nature of conflicting ideologies in general. They are, and always have been there if you take the time to investigate.

 

[csuguy]

Actually, no, it wasn't.

Prior to and during WW1, other parts of the world (namely eastern europe) were caught up in a battle of ideologies, mostly political, but here in the U.S. we were mostly uninterested in any of that. We had a few ideological rabble-rousers of our own (communists and racial purists) but they never gained much traction among the masses.

We didn't enter into the world wars for ideology, either. We did it mostly for the defense of ourselves and of our allies. They were defensive wars, not ideological campaigns. And by the time WW2 ended, we had become more unified as a people than at any other time in our history. We taxed the rich (and they didn't complain), we helped the poor, sick, and old. We worked hard, and together, and we created the wealthiest, healthiest, most educated, law-abiding, and contented nation in history.

But with all that luxury and freedom came the luxury of idealism and the decadence of the 'baby boom' generation. Yet even they didn't become the hard core ideologues that we see so many of our fellow citizens becoming, today.

You are simply wrong here; there was plenty of ideology - even if it was so well accepted that it wasn't recognized as such. The American Dream, Puritan Work Ethics, Patriotism, and the ideologies of Freedom and Prosperity. And when we went to war, we waged war in the name of Freedom & Prosperity - to topple dictators and establish freedom and the free market!

It is true that we didn't initially engage in the World Wars for the purpose of spreading our ideologies; but that doesn't mean they weren't there, being used as propaganda to enlist the people. Furthermore, American Ideology also played a HUGE factor in the Cold War, in the tension and animosity between America and Soviet Russia.

I see a lot of problems with it. Both historically, and currently.

Ideologues who conflate their own identity with their ideologies have a great tendency to become confused in their reactions to disagreement and criticism. Because they have conflated themselves (and their egos) with their ideology, they take an attack on their ideology as an attack on them, personally. They take people who disagree with their ideology as their 'personal enemies', and as a result they way over-react in the form and intensity of their defensiveness. It was exactly this kind of personalized ideological over-reaction that started WW1 in Eastern Europe. And it's exactly this same kind of personalized ideological over-reaction that fueled the attack on the U.S. on 9/11.

People who cannot recognize the difference between a personal attack and an ideological disagreement tend to react to ideological disagreements personally, and often even violently, because they feel as if their own person is being attacked.

This depends upon the ideology & the individual in question. If one believes that disagreement with their beliefs is some kind of heresy worthy of death - then yes you are going to get this kind of extremism. Or if the ideology simply labels various groups as outright evil that needs to be purged, etc. In other words, if the ideology is extremist you will see these kinds of behaviors.

However, just because someone holds to an ideology - that is to say, they hold certain principles, beliefs, and values as important and thereby define who they are - does not mean that you will see this behavior. A Christian, for instance, who actually holds to the teachings of the scriptures, is not going to display hate and bigotry. Instead, they will love their enemy.

When I was growing up, people tended to identify themselves relative to what they did in life, not what they believed ideologically. My dad thought of himself as a truck driver, a husband, and a father. And he was proud of being all those things. And as such, he felt like a contributing member of his community, which was made up of other similar contributing members. He didn't see himself as being at war with his own government, or his fellow citizens, or anyone, because he wasn't an ideologue. He didn't believe that his personal identity was being attacked every time someone disagreed with his personal ideology.

It's not that my dad didn't believe in certain ideals. He did. But his ideology didn't define him. And didn't define the way he viewed or interacted with other people. Instead, he viewed others as being much like himself: men and women who were all contributing as he was to the general well-being of his community. But that's because my dad grew up through WW2. He was too young to fight, (he fought in Korea,) but he learned the lesson of national and civil unity that all those people who lived through the war years learned.

They were, I believe, America's greatest generation. And part of their greatness was in their sense of unity of purpose, as American citizens. The 'lone ideologues' of today have thrown that sense of national and civil unity right out the window, because they can't tolerate anyone who dares to disagree with them. They have become nations unto themselves, and are thus dividing the actual nation into endless 'enemy factions'.

And there you go - ideology: you just fail to recognize it as such.