Do political parties in democratic systems need to ground themselves in distinct ideologies, or can they succeed by presenting themselves solely as providers of good governance?
The hallmarks of good governance—healthcare, education, employment, housing, transportation, efficient and corruption-free administration, and an uninterrupted supply of water, gas, and electricity—are undoubtedly vital. These are the tangible deliverables people expect from any government. But does this pragmatic approach render political ideology irrelevant? Is good governance alone enough to meet the deeper aspirations of a democratic populace?
In a democracy, receiving essential services isn’t a gift from a benevolent government; it is a fundamental right. Beyond food, shelter, and healthcare, people crave freedoms that are intrinsic to their humanity. The right to express, protest, explore, educate, communicate, travel, and earn are foundational to a free society, enshrined in democratic ideals. When these freedoms are eroded, a political party’s ideological identity often fades into obscurity.
Take Cuba, Venezuela, and China as examples. These nations, operating under socialist or communist banners, deny many liberties that free societies take for granted. Even in India, under its democratic framework, dissenting voices face increasing suppression, with fear becoming a tool of governance.
Contrast this with the United States, where the ideological divide between Republicans and Democrats remains clear. Whether it’s gun control or abortion, the two parties represent distinct values and policies. Similarly, Canada’s Liberals, Conservatives, and New Democrats uphold their ideological distinctions, as do Britain’s Conservatives and Labour Party within the world’s oldest democratic tradition.
However, in many other democracies, ideological commitments often dissolve in the pragmatism of power politics. India’s political landscape exemplifies this. Leaders and party members frequently shift allegiances, crossing ideological and even religious lines for personal or political gain. Such opportunism blurs the ideological lines that traditionally define political parties.
This trend is evident in India’s Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). Unlike the ideologically driven Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), AAP focuses on governance over ideology. Its leader, Arvind Kejriwal, summed it up: “If we find our solution on the Left, we borrow from the Left. If we find our solution on the Right, we borrow from the Right.” This pragmatic approach has resonated with voters, as evidenced by AAP’s successive victories in Delhi elections and its 2022 municipal poll triumph.
In contrast, the BJP adheres to a rigid ideological framework rooted in Hindutva, striving to transform India into a “Hindu nation.” However, this dogmatic vision often clashes with the diverse religious, linguistic, and cultural fabric of the country. To maintain power, the BJP has not hesitated to make alliances that contradict its core ideology—as seen in its 2018 coalition with the Peoples Democratic Party in Jammu and Kashmir, a party advocating “self-rule” and autonomy.
Globally, coalition politics highlights the prioritization of power over ideology. Sweden’s October 2022 election saw far-left and far-right parties form an unexpected alliance, demonstrating how ideological opposites can converge for political expediency.
This emerging trend—power trumping ideology—is reshaping democracies worldwide. Governments increasingly focus on delivering basic survival needs while sidelining fundamental liberties. While this approach may appease immediate demands, it risks eroding the ideological frameworks that uphold democratic values and ensure enduring freedoms.
As the global political landscape evolves, the question remains: Can governance divorced from ideology truly sustain the aspirations of a free and democratic society?
Promod Puri.com 