The tendency to declare ideologies dead and what that may indicate

Lately, I've been reading many statements claiming that ideologies are dead and no longer valid.

The importance of principles in politics and the consequences of lacking them
Against false dichotomies: communism and national-socialism are the same scum

Today There are areas where the word ideology has a very bad reputation. However, this shouldn't be the case. According to the RAE, an ideology is a "set of fundamental ideas that characterizes the thinking of a person, a group, or an era, a cultural, religious, or political movement, etc." Obviously, not all ideologies are equally accurate. Having a democratic ideology is certainly much better than defending an authoritarian or totalitarian ideology, such as communism and Nazism.

Some people have very clear ideas, while others suffer from a clear emptiness, ambiguity, or lack of definition in the realm of ideas, as demonstrated by some politicians and parties who change their positions on important issues, throwing their principles overboard as soon as certain interests or motivations collide with their ideas. Likewise, there are those who defend their ideology with fanaticism, displaying clear intolerance toward any opinion different from their own, and there are those who defend their ideas with a critical sense, leaving room for doubt and acknowledging the right of others to propose different ideas.

On the other hand, all ideologies have inconsistent supporters, who claim to defend one thing and then do something quite different. But that doesn't mean ideologies are dead, because a system of ideas doesn't necessarily cease to have supporters just because some of them don't sincerely believe in it. If anything, what is in poor health is the coherence of some, their ability to act in accordance with the principles they claim to defend.

With regard to ideologies, incoherence isn't the only problem: ambiguity can become an even bigger problem. I'm referring to those who, in the realm of ideas, position themselves in such a way that they can lead to confusion or uncertainty.

This is precisely what often happens among many of those who consider ideologies dead. For them, ideology is not dead, but rather an obstacle. This is what often happens in a political party, for example, when it tries to attract votes from different groups, often with different ideas. This is what is known in politics as a "catch-all party." When we talk about these types of parties, which are very common in democratic countries, a question always remains: Are they really ideologically ambiguous, or do they have an ideology but disguise it to attract more support?

Regardless of the answer to that question, this ambiguity tends to be compensated for with appeals to leadership or a common enemy, which function as temporary distractions until the party has to take a position on specific, more or less controversial issues. At this point, disappointment sets in. But as always happens with these things, it's worth asking to what extent this disappointment is partly the fault of those disappointed, for trusting those who take an ambiguous position. Did you vote for a party that didn't take a stand ideologically and then wonder when it reveals its cards?

---

Photo: Rawpixel.