The Death of the Political Manifesto

The Death of the Political Manifesto

Apr 10 , 2026. By Shumye Getu (PhD) ( Shumye Getu (shumye.getu@addisfortune.net) studied philosophy at a doctoral level and lectures at universities. )

Political discourse appeared to have moved to the centre in recent years, with two parties, the incumbent Prosperity Party (PP) and the opposition Ethiopian Citizens for Social Justice (EZEMA), standing as illustrations.

Both have promoted and debated the idea that they are not prisoners of ideology. Their leaders claim they have changed, are no longer driven by ideology, and prefer a more "practical politics". This position was visible in the public debate contesting the general polls slated for June this year. Serious ideological debates are pushed aside in party engagement.

However, their claim should raise questions about whether ideology has ceased to define political thoughts, or whether it survives in a subtler form.

Has ideology been replaced by pragmatism, born from mistrust of grand political narratives and a preference for outcome-based legitimacy?

These are the arguments used to justify stepping away from ideology as a guide for political conviction and action. Yet, under democratic principles, ideologies play a central role in shaping political systems and setting the course of a state’s social, economic and political development.

If parties seeking public office are not loyal to guiding principles, how can they earn the public's trust that they will keep their promises? On what basis can they be held responsible if a defined principle, or political ideology do not guide them? What would stop them from acting as they wish in their claims that they "aren't prisoners of ideology” and therefore they "don't stick to universal ideals,” which many citizens may think they understand?

Supporters of this shift argue that abandoning political ideology in favour of pragmatism offers an alternative. It is better, they would argue, to be flexible, action-oriented and focused on solving problems. It allows political actors to adopt a realistic approach and focus on practical results rather than ideological dogma.

However, ideology reflects the convictions and actions of political parties. It gives meaning to their dreams and aspirations. It also serves as a covenant that can limit their power and make them accountable when they fail to live up to the ideals they pledged to fulfil.

In its early form, the ideology of a political party focused on principles such as limiting government power and promoting individual freedom. This view proffers that political ideologies remain important, and that politics can become dangerous when it runs without them. Political ideology supports political parties' embrace of democratic ideals and practices.

In historical terms, the idea of political ideology can be traced to the British philosopher John Locke, who argued that free individuals were the foundation of a stable society. He rejected the philosophical basis of monarchy and argued that all people had natural rights to life, liberty and property. He described government as a “social contract,” under which individuals surrender only a limited part of their rights, while government, in return, protects those rights.

Those ideas of natural rights and the social contract helped form the ideological basis of later political events, including revolutions led by political elites and parties.

Political scientists argue that ideology contains the ideals, goals and purposes a society should pursue. An interpretation of the past explains the present and offers a vision of the future. It helps shape the operating logic of political parties and the political system. It guides the direction of a state’s political and economic development. It also articulates the purpose and the limits of political power.

The ideologies embraced by political parties have also mobilised societies, inspired revolutions and produced fierce conflict. Repeated world wars, genocides and economic collapse fed ideological fatigue. Dogmas that once triumphed now face scepticism because of inequality, institutional dysfunction, unresolved global crises, and failed promises.

As grand ideologies that once promised equality, liberation or national destiny lost the power to inspire trust and sacrifice, a different political age began to emerge, driven less by intention than by emotion. Immediate outcomes now matter more than coherent philosophical views of how society should be organised. Politics is no longer anchored in competing ideological visions. It is increasingly about mobilising emotion, managing sentiment and delivering short-term results.

That fatigue has helped produce a post-ideological era anchored in pragmatism. It operates less through grand doctrine than through fragmentation, outcome-based politics and fluid identity. A party shaped by pragmatism puts “what works” ahead of what is ideologically coherent. It prefers action to doctrine, while policies and decisions are justified by prompt outcomes rather than logical consistency or governing principle.

Political organisation is increasingly shaped by ethnicity, religion, language, gender, and cultural belonging, with these factors replacing grand narratives as the main sources of alignment and conflict.

The shift to a post-ideological age may have weakened rigid dogma, but it has also created a troubling vacuum in politics, one rich in noise but poor in principle and shared values. Grand narratives have given way to emotion, and political power stands exposed, continuing without moral legitimacy. Political ideologies once gave elites direction and helped orient policy and action, leaving no confusion about whether they were on the right track.

That clarity does not hold in a post-ideological era, where principle is fluid and moral legitimacy is fragile. Universal values give way to populism and short-term outcomes. Political parties now seek legitimacy through results and performance, asking citizens to judge them by economic growth, service delivery and management. Electoral success depends more on managerial competence and media perception than on ideological persuasion.

PUBLISHED ON Apr 10,2026 [ VOL 27 , NO 1354]