Writer Between Worlds

“Four main classes of explanation have been most frequently employed: the cathartic, the morale, the solidarity, and the advocatory.

By the “cathartic explanation” is meant the venerable safety-valve or scapegoat theory. Emotional tension is drained off by being displaced onto symbolic enemies (“The Jews,” “Big Business,” “The Reds,” and so forth). The explanation is as simple-minded as the device; but that, by providing legitimate objects of hostility (or, for that matter, of love), ideology may ease somewhat the pain of being a petty bureaucrat, a day laborer, or a small-town storekeeper is undeniable.

By the “morale explanation” is meant the ability of an ideology to sustain individuals (or groups) in the face of chronic strain, either by denying it outright or by legitimizing it in terms of higher values. (…) Ideology bridges the emotional gap between things as they are and as one would have them be, thus insuring the performance of roles that might otherwise be abandoned in despair or apathy.

By the “solidarity explanation” is meant the power of ideology to knit a social group or class together. To the extent that it exists, the unity of the labor movement, the business community, or the medical profession obviously rests to a significant degree on common ideological orientation; and the South would not be The South without the existence of popular symbols charged with the emotions of a pervasive social predicament.

Finally, by the “advocatory explanation” is meant the action of ideologies (and ideologists) in articulating, however partially and indistinctly, the strains that impel them, thus forcing them into the public notice. “Ideologists state the problems for the larger society, take sides on the issues involved and ‘present them in the court’ of the ideological market place.” Although ideological advocates (not altogether unlike their legal counterparts) tend as much to obscure as to clarify the true nature of the problems involved, they at least call attention to their existence and, by polarizing issues, make continued neglect more difficult. (…)

It is here, however, in the investigation of the social and psychological roles of ideology, as distinct from its determinants, that strain theory itself begins to creak and its superior incisiveness, in comparison with interest theory, to evaporate.”

Geertz, Clifford. The Interpretation of Cultures (Basic Books Classics) (pp. 223-224). Basic Books. Kindle Edition.