Greed for Power Ideology of Politics

by Poonam I Kaushish

Nothing costs a nation more than a cheap politician. This lexicon holds true in the political season of swapping lovers. Whereby, it’s difficult to keep tabs on whose sleeping with whom, who’s jumping into which bed, eloping with whom, tying the nuptial knot and divorcing whom. Who’s in, who’s out, who’s entering which door and cutting which deals --- sideways and under. Who’s cutting corners or double-crossing whom? Who’s back-stabbing who, as friends and enemies are all rolled into one in this constant eddy of defections. All, for Power.

An issue which haunts Mamata’s TMC which has lost 20 MPs to ‘unknown’ Tripura regional outfit Nationalist Citizens Party along-with 59 MLAs earlier. Ditto Kejriwal’s AAP who’s seven MPs crossed to BJP as had Thackeray’s Shiv Sena and Pawar’s NCP to form a coalition Government in Maharashtra.

Confided a defected TMC leader, “With BJP emerging as the dominant State and national political force, we found ourselves under pressure from a large, more resourceful opponent who could arm-twist us. So the challenge was no longer merely about staying relevant but survival, hence we defected.”

Arguably, what is the purpose of a Party? To preserve its identity, conserve ideology it was created to serve? Remain relevant in a steadily shrinking political space? Massaging egos? Or is winning and being in power, the be-all-and- end- all of politics?

Undoubtedly, when power is the goal of politics, ideology has no leg to stand on. The reality of today’s practical politics. Power is the means through which Parties implement policies. Without power, ideology remains just a set of ideas. But when pursuit of power becomes the overriding objective, ideology becomes secondary, flexible or even disposable.

Obversely, defenders of political pragmatism argue that ideological purity without power accomplishes little. Compromises, alliances, and tactical shifts are necessary to win elections and govern. Consequently, power matters.

Raising a moot point: How much ideological compromise is acceptable in the pursuit of power? What’s the relationship between MPs-MLAs and his constituents? Are they just representatives or is there a deeper moral bond, now forgotten?

Think. When leaders campaign they present a certain image of themselves, subscribing to certain beliefs, promise to do certain things and commit themselves to function within confines of loyalty to the Party they belong to. It is on this basis they get votes. So when they defect is it not a breach of the terms on which they sought a ticket and fought elections? Is it not a betrayal to their Party and voter? Why did they choose to rebel when their Party was defeated? Why not earlier? Would they have rebelled if the Party had won?

Underscoring, individual meanness, opportunism and a share of the power pie is the glue that keeps all together. Indeed, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, morality be damned. Confided a leader, “Hum sab ek hi thaali ke chate-bate hain aur is maryada ke hamam mein nagain hai!”

Succinctly, these paper tigers who sell their political soul to the highest bidder in this political nautanki are dubbed smart. Whereby, every Party and its leaders have perfected the art of beguiling its hum zulfs and dushmans with aplomb, saddling us with opportunists and liars. Exposing the disdain with which our netagan holds democracy and voters.

Thereby, exposing politics of the worst kind, cultivating low morality and high greed --- and need of the hour. A power-play when personality-oriented malicious vilification seems to have became the hallmark of democracy. Sans shared ideology and mutual objectives. This pithily is aaj ki rajneeti.

Sadly, our leaders credibility has hit rock bottom. The greed for power is overpowering. Politicians invoke ideology while in Opposition but seem willing to set it aside when power is at stake. That gap between rhetoric and behavior is what leads to the conclusion that power is the real ideology of politics.

Said a senior leader, “Ideology gains supporters and gets Parties elected; power keeps us alive and allows us to implement anything at all. Without power, ideology remains only a slogan. Hence, power becomes the sole goal.” Big deal, if Parties eventually lose credibility and become indistinguishable from one another.

Can we merely shrug our shoulders and dismiss it as political kalyug? If one accepts the premise that power politics has overshadowed ideology, then the way forward is not necessarily to abandon politics, but to reconnect power with purpose Parties must define non-negotiable principles. They can compromise on tactics, alliances, and policies, but there should be core values that cannot be traded away.

A Party ideally exists to advance a set of ideas, policies, and interests — not merely to preserve its own organizational existence. In theory, the Party is a vehicle for an ideology or a political vision. In practice, however, Parties often face a tension between two goals: Preserving ideology and staying true to principles on which Party was founded, even if that costs votes, power, or members. Or preserving the organization – adapting, compromising or changing positions to remain electorally viable and keep Party alive.

When voters conclude that there is no limit to that compromise, trust in Parties and politicians tends to decline. When Parties refuse all compromise, they may remain principled but struggle to influence policy. Democratic politics is often a constant balancing act between those two extremes.

The practical way forward is for Parties to decide whether it is primarily: a movement built around an idea, a vehicle built around a leader or an electoral machine focused on winning power. The more clearly a Party answers this, the more likely it will survive periods of turmoil. Parties that know what they stand for can lose leaders and still endure. Parties that stand only for power often find it harder to retain loyalty once power begins to ebb.

However, saying ideology is completely irrelevant may go too far. Ideology still influences Indian politics in important ways: BJP has built much of its appeal around nationalism, cultural identity and governance themes. CPM continue to be guided by a distinct ideological framework even when electorally weak. Regional parties often champion federalism, linguistic identity, or regional interests. Voters themselves frequently make choices based on values, identity, and policy preferences, not just patronage.

Certainly, a course correction is possible. This depends whether voters, civil society groups, courts and leaders demand it at the same time. Without sustained public pressure, politics tends to drift toward what wins elections rather than what best reflects ideology. Till such time, power is the operational ideology of much of politics, regardless of what Parties claim publicly.

India today is at the moral crossroads. In this game of lies, deceit and deception, BJP, Congress and regional outfits reflect the emerging truth of today’s India. Power is all.

But, for voters it raises a serious concern: If leaders can move across political lines with ease while claiming a moral high ground, then what are we voting for? A belief system? Or a moment in a larger negotiation of power? What ideology? What principles? Or does the wind simply tells us which way to blow. What gives? ---- INFA