Beyond the confines of ideology

The concept of ‘post-ideology’ often causes profound unease, as it suggests that the era of sweeping political narratives and dogmas is giving way to amore pragmatic, technocratic approach to governance.

- BY NADEEM F. PARACHA

For many, this transition is a deeply troubling thought that feels like a betrayal of the very soul of politics.

Critics frequently ask how systems can function without a moral compass. For instance, the American scholar Francis Fukuyama noted that humans possess an innate desire for ‘thymos’ or the recognition of their dignity, which is often tied to the grand visions and ideological frameworks that post-ideology seeks to discard.

While it is true that pragmatism and realism are themselves forms of ideological thought, they differ fundamentally from ‘hard’ ideologies such as socialism, fascism, liberalism, nationalism etc. Unlike these boxed frameworks, realism/pragmatism is a fluid, outcome-oriented approach that prioritises the survival and prosperity of society over the preservation of abstract theory.

To paraphrase the American philosopher John Dewey, “An idea is true only insofar as it works.” Pragmatism, therefore, is a concept of tangible results rather than a set of moral commands. The German-American political scientist Hans Morgenthau argued that political realism is governed by objective laws of interest rather than moralistic or ideological preferences.

A shift towards post-ideology governance is accelerating, representing a significant global phenomenon. Narratives once defined by the existential struggles between hard ideologies are increasingly being replaced by models that prioritise state efficiency, economic results and social stability. This transition is recognised by political scientists as a ‘managerial’ turn in global politics, a concept first pioneered by the American political theorist James Burnham.