Many people are accustomed to thinking that ideology belongs to others, but has nothing to do with us. They (nationalists, communists or fascists) have ideological attitudes, while we have a sober and objective view of things. Of course it isn’t. Ideology is not at all limited to left and right, communism or capitalism. Everyone who belongs to some social group (religious, professional, gender) has it and shares its views and interests.
Ideology affects us through mental models. Mental models are the result of the interaction of the attitudes of our social group with the memory, personal experience and biography of each of us. These patterns show up in our words when we discuss, interpret, and evaluate what is happening around us. Thus, ideology is indirectly reflected in the language of journalists, the speeches of politicians, and in the conversations of colleagues.
One of the most common models is the opposition of insiders and outsiders. And “we” always turn out to be good, and “they” always turn out to be bad. Therefore, we mention our shortcomings (as well as their advantages) in passing. One of the most famous examples is the phrase of US President Ronald Reagan: «Mistakes were made» («Mistakes were made»). In this passive construction there is no subject — the one who made mistakes and is responsible for them.
Ideology is the habit of dividing everyone into friends and foes. and of course, «we» are always good, and «they» are bad
But if an “alien” is to blame, in the headlines it will certainly play an active syntactic role, and a particular case will be interpreted as a manifestation of a general trend. The desire to bring to the fore «our» virtues and hide the shortcomings of «our» position is clearly manifested in the slogans of supporters and opponents of abortion: some defend the «right to choose», others — the «right to life».
Discrimination can manifest itself in small things that we don’t even notice: in the form of address, intonation, method of argumentation, in concessive constructions (“I have many Jewish friends, but …”) or political metaphors (immigration as an uncontrolled water element: “… through the border was flooded with a stream of refugees, an influx of guest workers, visitors flooded the city «…).
The choice of vocabulary has also always been an ideological tool: the same people can be terrorists and fighters for the faith, and the same events can be occupation or liberation, depending on the speaker’s attitudes. Language betrays our prejudices and at the same time imposes them on us. But I’m not a pessimist. There have always been and always will be forms of resistance to dominant ideologies, it is always possible to reformulate ideals and set new goals for society. For this to happen, last but not least, it is important to be critical of what we read, hear and … say ourselves*.
*Based on the report «Ideology and Discourse» at the First International Conference «Language, Mentality, Text» (University of Granada, Spain, June 2011).