This is probably the fundamental dimension of 'ideology': ideology is not simply a 'false consciousness', an illusory representation of reality, it is rather this reality itself which is already to be conceived as 'ideological' - 'ideological' is a social reality whose very existence implies the non-knowledge of its participants as to its essence -that is, the social effectivity, the very reproduction of which implies that the individuals 'do not know what they are doing'. 'Ideological is not the false consciousness of a (social) being but this being itself in so far as it is supported by "false consciousness"'. Thus we have finally reached the dimension of the symptom, because one of its possible definitions would also be 'a formation whose very consistency implies a certain non-knowledge on the part of the subject': the subject can 'enjoy his symptom' only in so far as its logic escapes him - the measure of the success of its interpretation is precisely its dissolution. -Slavoj Zizek

So, I strongly disagree. The emergence of ideology is the expression of consciousness itself. Being is not consciousness, but the foundation for consciousness. But, being, idealistically is not durational. It is, in the moment, but as soon as we add duration ideology becomes necessary. Now we have being in addition to transformation through time. Ideology is simply the recognition of the transformation of being and how to use that to achieve goals we have set. Ideology is not the failure of logic which is absurd. With right goals, ideology is the struggle to understand the transformation of being through time in order to create a plan to achieve effects in reality. Of course the best path to do this is planning with logic and reason, and of course with objective reality and fundamental correspondence theory of truth.