A myth in modern politics is that ideology precedes the will to power. When we think of politics, we tend to focus on ideologies like Liberalism, Socialism, and Conservatism. We see political parties as faithful adherents to these great traditions. But is it a modern myth? What if the true purpose of a political party has very little to do with ideology? What if the real purpose since 2000 years has been to manage brutal, timeless power?
The current political system, despite its democratic ideals, primarily functions as a structure to select a new ruling class. This is a modern equivalent of kings and nobility, and true citizen influence requires a radical new model. To understand this, we start with the very word ideology.
From the Science of Ideas to the Iron Law
The term ideology was coined around the French Revolution by Antoine Destutt de Tracy. The meaning was literally the science of ideas. Ironically, it was soon weaponized by Napoleon, who used it as a derogatory term for his intellectual opponents. The word was born in politics and immediately became a tool to combat political opponents.
Crucially, political parties existed long before modern ideologies. After Ancient Rome, 17th and 18th-century England saw parties like the Whigs and Tories fighting for state power. This was long before Liberalism or Socialism were fully formulated. It was only during the 19th century—driven by industrialization and social upheaval—that the three classic ideological foundations crystallized:
- Liberalism: Championing individual freedom, the free market, and the rule of law.
- Conservatism: Prioritizing tradition, gradual change, and social cohesion.
- Socialism: Focusing on equality, collective ownership, and the workers’ movement.
As we move into the 20th and 21st centuries, the ideological landscape becomes more blended. We see the rise of hybrid forms like Social Liberalism and Christian Democracy. New focus areas like Green Ideologies emerged. Ideologies today function more as reference frames rather than rigid manuals. Most modern parties are ideological mixes. They borrow from various schools of thought to attract the widest possible electorate.
This complexity leads to a powerful, cynical truth articulated by sociologist Robert Michels in 1911. By the “Iron Law of Oligarchy“, he argues that all organizations, no matter how democratic, eventually devolve into oligarchies. The original ideals—be they Socialist or Liberal—are secondary to the organization’s need for efficiency. Primary drives are the leaders’ will to power and the members’ tendency towards apathy. The party goes from a means to an end in itself: a machine for selecting and maintaining an elite. The primary role of a political party is not to represent voters or implement an ideology. It is to select rulers and secure institutional power, Michels concluded.
The Democratic Ideal vs. The Arena of Power
The fundamental promise of representative democracy is that “The political system is a function to give citizens influence over society.” However, as we just discussed, the political system can also be seen as an arena for power struggles. Let’s look at the critical problems with that democratic ideal:
- The Autonomy of Institutions: The system consists of complex bodies—governments, parliaments, courts—that develop a life and logic of their own. Bureaucratic inertia, lobbying, and politicians’ self-interest often reduce direct citizen influence. The institutions end up shaping the agenda without listening to the people’s will.
- System Survival First: A political system’s most primal task is to maintain order and stability. Its own legitimacy comes first — regardless of citizen input. As sociologist Niklas Luhmann argued, the system’s core function is to reduce social complexity and ensure its own reproduction. To give citizens influence is often a means to achieve legitimacy, not the opposite.
- Unequal Distribution of Influence: The statement treats “the citizens” as a homogeneous group, but influence is unequally distributed. Socioeconomic status, education, network, and time mean that some citizens’ voices are amplified far beyond others. The current system often reinforces existing inequalities, concentrating power in the hands of the elite party apparatus.
The Iron Law concluded that the main function of political parties is to select and maintain party elites. Thus, the only way to achieve true, continuous popular influence is to bypass the elitist structures of the traditional parties.
The Need for Peer Democracy
If political parties are structured to choose an elite, then our vote on election day is very little about ideas. We grant our next set of rulers the mandate to govern for four years without continuous accountability on specific issues.
The solution is not a more rigid ideology, but a radical shift in structure. We must evolve beyond parties that are Houses of Power and embrace “Internet Parties”. The internet allows an agenda driven by the principle of Peer Democracy. This is a grassroots movement, starting at the lowest political level (locally, regionally), aiming to scale up globally. Peer Democracy will leave the national level as an arena for traditional parties.
Imagine political parties that commit to transferring decision-making to citizens via an app. Everyone has the right to vote on a couple of issues a year. Citizens themselves choose which important issues they want to vote on. Equal democracy would restore the influence of the people. It also gives them the ability to influence specific policy issues and bypass the vested interests of the party elite.
The will of the party apparatus oligarchy should be replaced with the collective wisdom of the people. We must create political organizations that can distribute influence evenly and fairly among citizens between elections. Only in this way can we transform the political system into a means of achieving equal citizen influence. Only in this way can we circumvent the political parties’ fight for power and positions.