Nigeria’s Political Parties’ Collective Ideological Bankruptcy As A Threat To Democracy

Isaac Asabor

In most thriving democracies, political parties are not just vehicles for acquiring power, they are ideological institutions grounded in a clear vision of governance, policy direction, and the social contract. They represent coherent philosophies, conservatism, liberalism, socialism, or centrism, each defining a party’s character, shaping its policies, and guiding its engagement with the electorate. In Nigeria, however, political parties are increasingly becoming ideological orphans, bereft of defined philosophies, united only by opportunism, and driven more by personal ambition than public good.

The absence of ideology in Nigerian political parties is not a new phenomenon. Still, it has reached a crisis point in recent years, and the symptoms are glaring. Political defections are as common as rainfall in the rainy season. Politicians move across party lines with neither shame nor scrutiny, not because of ideological disagreements, but purely in search of power, protection, or political patronage. A politician who was denouncing a party on a Monday can become its spokesperson by Friday, with no realignment of values or policies to justify the switch.

The result is that the electorate is left confused, demoralized, and disengaged. They vote not based on principles but personalities, or worse, ethnicity and religion. The 2023 general election cycle exposed this rot once more. Rather than see debates centered on economic ideologies, education reform, healthcare models, or foreign policy, the campaigns were full of mudslinging, slogans, half-baked promises, and tribal appeals.

What is the ideology of the All Progressives Congress (APC)? What economic philosophy does the People's Democratic Party (PDP) espouses? How does the LaborParty define its labor ideals outside the popularity of Peter Obi? Scratch the surface of their manifestos and you find platitudes, not principles. They are long on rhetoric but short on direction.

For instance, the APC, which emerged as a coalition of opposition parties in 2013, styled itself as a progressive party. But after winning the presidency in 2015, it quickly descended into the same old habits of the PDP it had criticized, bloated government, lack of transparency, policy inconsistency, and disregard for internal democracy. Its handling of the economy, security, and rule of law mirrored, if not worsened, the very failings it once vowed to correct.

On the other hand, the PDP, once in power for sixteen unbroken years, never convincingly communicated a core ideology beyond "power rotation" and "national spread." It governed largely by expediency, with policy decisions often dictated by political survival rather than a deep-rooted commitment to any philosophical worldview.

The emergence of the Labour Party as a third force was initially seen as a breath of fresh air. But even that hope was driven more by the charisma and prudence associated with its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, than any ideological framework held by the party. Remove Obi from the equation, and what remains of the Labour Party? Its internal contradictions and disorganization make it clear that the party lacks institutional coherence.

This lack of ideology is deeply detrimental to national development. Without ideological foundations, there can be no consistency in policy. Government programs are routinely abandoned once new administrations take over, not because they are ineffective, but because they were initiated by political opponents. Institutions are weakened, long-term plans are discarded, and national progress is stunted by political short-sightedness.

But not all hope is lost. Grassroots movements, especially those led by local organizers, civil society activists, student unions, and community leaders, are beginning to ignite political consciousness at the bottom of the pyramid. These movements, rooted in lived realities, have the potential to inspire ideological parties. Why? Because they are often driven by clear demands: food security, job creation, quality education, environmental justice, and human rights. When these demands coalesce and find expression in political platforms, they give birth to more ideologically grounded parties.

Grassroots movements offer what national parties lack: authenticity and clarity of purpose. Their proximity to the people makes them more accountable and more in touch with real issues. By institutionalizing these movements or allowing them to evolve into party wings, Nigeria can slowly but surely grow ideologically sound political structures from the ground up.

Another game-changing force in this reform is the youth. Nigeria is a country of the young, about 70% of its population is under the age of 35. Yet, its politics is disproportionately run by aging oligarchs who are often out of touch with 21st-century realities. The #EndSARSprotest was a watershed moment in Nigeria’s political history, it revealed the potential of young people to demand reform, reject status-quo leadership, and organize without political godfathers.

If Nigeria’s youth decide to form or reshape political parties with digital tools, fresh thinking, and strong values, centered on integrity, innovation, and inclusive governance, the country could finally witness an ideological revival. But that requires moving from protests to policy, from anger to articulation, and from hashtags to hard-headed political strategy.

Still, Nigeria does not have to reinvent the wheel. Around the world, there are external models that can offer guidance. For instance, South Africa's African National Congress (ANC), despite its own struggles, was built on a strong ideological foundation of anti-apartheid resistance and African socialism. The UK’s Labour and Conservative parties, Germany’s Christian Democrats and Social Democrats, or the Democratic and Republican parties in the U.S., all offer structured examples of ideological clarity, even if they also face internal contradictions.

By studying how parties in these democracies function, Nigeria can adopt useful practices, party think tanks, youth ideological academies, transparent primaries, structured debates, and issue-based campaigns. But these models must be localized. Nigeria’s cultural, ethnic, and historical realities are unique, so the borrowed models must be adapted to fit its soil, not planted wholesale.

So what is the way forward? First, there must be deliberate efforts to build ideological consciousness within political parties. This starts with their leadership but must permeate their structures. Parties must define what they stand for and communicate it clearly, not just in manifestos but in action. They must recruit members and field candidates based on alignment with their ideological stance, not just popularity or financial muscle.

Second, political education must be revived. Nigerians must be taught, from schools to communities, that democracy is not just about voting, it is about values, policies, and accountability. Civil society, media, and educational institutions must step up their roles in shaping informed citizens who demand ideological clarity and consistency.

Third, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) should be empowered to enforce stricter regulations on party operations. It must ensure that parties function beyond election cycles. Their internal democracy processes must be audited, and their manifestos should reflect a minimum ideological and policy standard.

Lastly, we need a new generation of politicians who believe in something greater than their ambition. Politicians who are not afraid to be called ideologues, who see politics as a tool for nation-building, not empire-building. Nigerians are tired of political parties that stand for everything and therefore stand for nothing.

The country deserves more than a recycled elite playing musical chairs with power. It deserves a vibrant political culture anchored in ideas, conviction, and vision. Until political parties shed their current skin of opportunism and don ideological robes of responsibility, Nigeria’s democracy will continue to wobble, and her people will continue to suffer.

In the final analysis, political parties are supposed to be the lifeblood of a democracy, not just its electoral machinery. They must offer more than candidates, they must offer conviction. Until that happens, we are merely electing shadows, not substance.

And as history has taught us, nations built on shadows cannot stand the test of time.