Difference between revisions of "Ideological Institution"

(Skull and Bones)
Line 4: Line 4:
  
 
[[Ideological Institution]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Ideological Institution]]}}
 
[[Ideological Institution]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Ideological Institution]]}}
 +
 +
==Examples==
 +
 +
{{#ask:[[Is an::Ideological Institutions]]}}
  
 
==Notes==
 
==Notes==
Line 17: Line 21:
 
</blockquote>  
 
</blockquote>  
 
    
 
    
 
 
Operates by perpetuating old energy archetypes, through ritual and also on going discussion.  
 
Operates by perpetuating old energy archetypes, through ritual and also on going discussion.  
  
Line 28: Line 31:
  
 
In an Atlantic article, Alexandra Robbins refers to an "especially susceptible kind of 'barbarian' as it pooh poohs the ideological functions of the organization, and diverts attention by casting skeptics and critics as conspiracy nuts.
 
In an Atlantic article, Alexandra Robbins refers to an "especially susceptible kind of 'barbarian' as it pooh poohs the ideological functions of the organization, and diverts attention by casting skeptics and critics as conspiracy nuts.
 
 
 
  
 
{{endstuff}}
 
{{endstuff}}
  
 
[[category:terms]][[Is a related term::Symbol Factory| ]][[Is a related term::Creation Template| ]][[Is a related term::Mode of Exploitation| ]]
 
[[category:terms]][[Is a related term::Symbol Factory| ]][[Is a related term::Creation Template| ]][[Is a related term::Mode of Exploitation| ]]

Revision as of 15:20, 19 January 2021

Ideological Institutions are "special instruments of... thought control that are staffed and/or controlled by those who" benefit from and therefore seek to, consciously and with considerable vigour, maintain systems that provide them with “special privileges and wealth."[1]

Related Terms

Ideological Institution > Archetypes, Hidden Curriculum, Hollywood, Mode of Exploitation, Symbol Factory

Examples

Notes

The modern education system, the Walt Disney Corp., Marvel Studies, and the Catholic church are all ideological institutions.[2]

Skull and Bones

A collegiate level ideological institution that focuses on recruiting the best and the brightest at Yale. Selections appear carefully researched, and designed to capture future film-makers, journalists, religious leaders, sports elites, military, and minority elites. See for example the comments of Lanny Davis, quoted in the Atlantic

If the society had a good year, this is what the "ideal" group will consist of: a football captain; a Chairman of the Yale Daily News; a conspicuous radical; a Whiffenpoof; a swimming captain; a notorious drunk with a 94 average; a film-maker; a political columnist; a religious group leader; a Chairman of the Lit; a foreigner; a ladies' man with two motorcycles; an ex-service man; a negro, if there are enough to go around; a guy nobody else in the group had heard of, ever.[3]

Operates by perpetuating old energy archetypes, through ritual and also on going discussion.

Collects "dirt" on its members, example, past sexual events, which may sometimes be offering evidence on "conquests" (which may reasonably be expected, given the deeply embedded patriarchy in America, to potentially an accounting of rapes).

One of the standard pieces of lore about Skull and Bones is that each member must at some point give an account of his sexual history, known as the CB (for "Connubial Bliss"). "After the first one or two times it's like guys listing their conquests, and that gets old," one young Bonesman told me recently. "There's just not that much to talk about"—and so CBs have evolved into relationship discussions. "It's the kind of stuff a lot of guys do with their teammates," says another Bonesman ('83). [4]

Bonesmen (what society members all themselves) refer to members of the public as "barbarians."

In an Atlantic article, Alexandra Robbins refers to an "especially susceptible kind of 'barbarian' as it pooh poohs the ideological functions of the organization, and diverts attention by casting skeptics and critics as conspiracy nuts.

Footnotes

  1. Ruyle, Eugene E. “Mode of Production and Mode of Exploitation: The Mechanical and the Dialectical.” Dialectical Anthropology 1, no. 1 (1975): 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00244565. p. 11
  2. Sosteric, Mike. “A Short Sociology of Archetypes,” Unpublished. https://www.academia.edu/43008763/A_Short_Sociology_of_Archetypes.
  3. Robbins, Alexandra. “George W., Knight of Eulogia.” The Atlantic, 2000. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2000/05/george-w-knight-of-eulogia/304686/.
  4. Robbins, Alexandra. “George W., Knight of Eulogia.” The Atlantic, 2000. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2000/05/george-w-knight-of-eulogia/304686/.