Ideological governance

Post Reply New Topic

Though it is pretty much a given that any party elected will govern based on their ideology, I am curious whether people here consider this acceptable. In my opinion, an ideology is generally an imaginary relationship to an actual problem/s in the real world. Governing by vacuous, rhetorical ideas of perfection instead of the issues that are actually at hand- that exist regardless of ideology- seems to me to be a terrible waste and one that is incredibly inefficient. However this seems to be the reality of politics and it is not common to hear people speak out about it; rather it is a "my ideology is better than yours" conflict. It also seems to be extremes of either end of the spectrum that support governing by ideology first and reality second (though of course they would not put it that way). Thoughts?


In case my poll options are confusing at all, I am trying to see the statistic of support for ideological governance based on political affiliation

Interesting question. Without ideological positions, elections become a question of technocratic preference. Where there is a broadly consensual style of politics this tendency is more marked, arguably in the post-war years in much of Europe this was largely the case. Where there are huge differences in the way folk want to see society going ideology is important, and voters may want to see clear principles, and governments to act according to these if these positions are the platform on which they are elected. Rigid adherence to ideology however in the face of complex problems is stupid. This leads to situations like ours in the UK where a chancellor hopelessly out of his depth is sticking with the same failing ideological policies as to do otherwise would be to concede ground, and to hell with the consequences. *Bangs head*

It's all ideology.