পোস্ট-আইডিওলজি" বা উত্তর-মতাদর্শিকতা—এই শব্দগুলো দিয়ে এনসিপি কী বোঝাতে চাচ্ছে কিংবা কী আড়াল করছে? এনসিপি কি সত্যিই নিরপেক্ষ থাকছে, না কি প্রচলিত সেক্যুলার মতাদর্শ বা ইসলামপন্থীদের চাপে ধীরে ধীরে নতি স্বীকার করছে? এ প্রশ্নগুলোর বিশ্লেষণ থাকছে এই লেখায়।

Post-ideology, centrism, and pluralism—these are among the buzzwords getting traction in Bangladesh politics. Leaders of the recently formed National Citizen Party (NCP) frequently invoke these terms to describe their vision, yet without offering much clarity. The NCP, which emerged from the National Citizens’ Committee formed 33 days into the 2024 July Revolution, officially a political party in February 2025. It brands itself as a “pro-Bangladeshi” party—but what does that actually mean? And why do these fuzzy terms matter? When pressed about their ideological stance, NCP leaders often respond with even more mystic, unclear phrases, such as Noya Rajnoitik Bondobosto (new political settlement), Dai O Doroder Rajniti (politics of accountability and care), and the ideas of civilizational nation and Second Republic. But, do these concepts resonate with the public, or do they only obscure meaning and alienate everyday citizens? Because the NCP is led by key figures of the July Revolution, a movement that stirred hope and expectation, these choices of words do matter. The people deserve clarity. This article runs a close examination of these elusive ideas to make sense of what the NCP is truly offering.

To begin, let us first look at the term post-ideology. NCP’s apparent thought leader Mahfuz Alam stated in his Facebook posts and interviews that the party would adopt a post-ideological stance, —meaning it would not stick to any established political ideology. This position was both appreciated and criticized by many on Facebook. But what does “post-ideology” actually mean?

Many social thinkers within the European philosophical tradition define the term Ideology. Among them include Karl Marx, Louis Althusser, Hannah Arendt, and Slavoj Zizek. While varied definitions exist in academia, ideology can be understood as a set of ideas, beliefs, and attitudes that influence our perception of social, political, and metaphysical worlds. In other words, ideology shapes our perception of reality. It explains our relationships with the world, gives meaning to our lives, and helps find our purpose and identity. Ideology dominates what we should or shouldn’t do and what is good or bad. From this angle, ideology works like a moral compass and guideline for our social and political actions in life.

Take Islamism, for instance. Islamism is a set of ideas and beliefs that not only interpret the reality and morality of its adherents but also give meaning and purpose to their life. Islamim thus shapes their identity and everyday social and political actions. For these reasons, Islamism is considered an ideology. Like Islamism, many other -isms are regarded as ideologies. For example, ‘capitalism’ is an ideology to Marx and ‘fascism’ is criticized as an ideology by Hannah Arendt. Similarly, liberalism, neoliberalism, conservatism, communism, feminism, and socialism function similar functions of ideology.

Now comes the next question: what is post-ideology? What does it mean to become post-ideological? In the political lexicon, post-ideology refers to the rejection of adherence to any traditional ideological trends (e.g., liberalism, communism, capitalism, conservatism, etc.). Daniel Bell, in his 1960 thesis, The End of Ideology, first argued that ideological clashes – such as conservatism versus liberalism or capitalism versus communism – had become irrelevant in Western societies. People in the West were no longer rigidly adhering to any ideologies (Marxism, Fascism, etc.), making ideologies obsolete in the society. Bell argued that people now solve problems according to democratic consensus and pragmatic means rather than conforming to any ideological prescriptions. Among many others, this idea was later advocated by Francis Fukuyama in his famous yet heavily disputed book, The End of History. Fukuyama argued, liberal democracy had triumphed over all other contesting ideologies in the West, making ideological conflicts nearly irrelevant.

Now, for NCP, what does it mean to be post-ideological in Bangladesh? It may suggest that the party will not subscribe to any traditional ideology from among those in Bangladesh. Instead, it will set its political agenda based on a practical problem-solving approach, which is considered pragmatism. NCP is reluctant to brand itself as an Islamist, or liberal, or communist-socialist party. This is perhaps what NCP might mean when it said “post-ideological” in Bangladesh.

But the bigger question remains whether an entirely post-ideological Bangladeshi society is truly possible. Can we live and act outside of any ideological boundary? Or should we assume then that NCP would feed us an invisible ideology in the name of post-ideology? If so, what exactly would that ideology be? Or is post-ideology itself another ideology? We just want to know.

These questions indeed are discussed in academic circles. Slavoj Žižek, one of the prominent critics of post-ideology, utterly rejects the concept of ‘post-ideology’. In his The Sublime Object of Ideology, Žižek argues that the belief in post-ideology has itself become an ideology and presented the concept of “cynical reason.” Cynical reasoning refers to a pattern of people's thoughts when they believe they don’t conform to any ideology but act and behave as if they do ("I know capitalism is unfair, but what can I do?"). Reason behind this system of thought is ideology that has become their common sense. So, they think they don't follow any ideology. But actually they follow an established ideology. Žižek dismisses the Western claim that people in Europe and America are living in a post-ideological era. They still follow an ideology and their social and political actions are shaped by that ideology. However, he says that this ideology becomes invisible and operates more effectively than the visible ones. Invisible ideologies operate through pop culture like media products like movies, sports, and everyday experiences. People do not see them. They are being enforced on people in subtle ways, imperceptible to the naked eyes. In his The Ticklish Subject, Žižek argued that neoliberal capitalism is rather the dominant ideology in American-Western societies. People cannot escape from this ideology even though they are told to believe in an utopia of post-ideology.

Now, we need to apply this fact to our society. Is it possible to become truly post-ideological in Bangladesh? The answer may not be in the affirmative. If a party like NCP refuses to take Islamism, communism, or another traditional ideology as its guiding philosophy, it will still operate within a certain system of ideology. For example, by virtue of living within a capitalist system and inside a modern nation-state, we cannot but live within a system of ideology that is secular and left-leaning in nature. Like capitalism or democracy, every system comes out as a product of certain historical developments and ideological inclinations. Here, a system refers to formal institutions and processes by which a state governs a territory and its people. Similarly, state apparatus refers to institutions such as education, media, laws, etc. which may not formally be part of the state but serve to transmit the values of the state.

To be specific about the nature of the Bangladesh state, it is primarily a secular and left-leaning liberal nation. The same spirit has remained consistent since the country’s independence, especially in terms of its constitutional, economic, academic, and institutional structures. However, such an underlying ideology becomes collective common sense and thus embedded in the constitution and in the state apparatus.

One can argue that Islamism has played a huge role in the politics of Bangladesh and even can render evidence in their favor by referring to the insertion of ‘Bismillahir Rahmanir Rahim’ (In the name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful) and the inclusion of Islam as the state religion in the constitution. Though these claims are factual, those changes have never given Islamism the upper hand over the secular left-liberal system nor over state apparatus. The state system has remained largely secular left-liberal in nature. It is important to note that Islamism has never been part of the mainstream. Secular left-liberal has always been the mainstream of Dhaka whereas Islamism has always been ‘other’ to the mainstream. Especially over the last 16 years under the authoritarian Sheikh Hasina regime, vestiges of Islamism were ripped out of the constitution and state apparatus.

So, if a party now seeks to pursue its political activity within Bangladesh without denying its pre-selected ideological set-up, it is nearly impossible for the party not to conform to the already established secular left-liberal ideological and institutional mechanism, no matter how many times the party utters the term post-ideology. Hence, if NCP firmly admits right now that it is going to be a post-ideological party. It means that it is going to submit itself to the secular left-liberal ideology that has become commonsensical to the deciding class and the state (here, deciding class means those who decide for the state, such as, elites, bureaucrats, media, politicians, intellectuals, civil society members etc.

From such a pattern, it is evident that the NCP may not be a post-ideological party in a true sense; it will rather serve an already established ideology in the state apparatus. Paradoxically, as a populist political party, NCP will need to appease Islamism in Bangladesh at the same time. It is evident from the practical political ground. Both the support base and the posted leaders of this party are predominantly right-wing. For this reason, it may not be possible for the NCP not to align with a right-wing ideology such as Islamism or to maintain neutrality during ideological debates. It was already exemplified when the party has recently included a transgender activist in its committee but was later compelled to disown the individual due to immense pressure from the support base and internal right-wingers. Several leaders even posted against the transgender activist, affirming their loyalty to Islamic values. NCP’s chief organiser, Hasnat Abdullah, posted on Facebook: "Before politics, my identity is that I am a Muslim. Nothing contrary to religious values will have a place in my or our politics." Whether a tactical move or a reality, the entire NCP narrative of post-ideology seems to have the first blow in transgender activist incident. Even in the case the party desperately wants to maintain such a post-ideological stance, the enormous pressure from its support base would debunk its possibility. Apparently, NCP may not overtly want to be an ideologically-driven party like becoming an outright Islamist party; however, external pressure or demand from the support base might force it to align with Islamic ideology.

In sum, if NCP truly remains committed to its promise of being post-ideological, it will have to reconcile between two difficult choices: either operating within the ongoing secular ideology or submitting to the pro-Islamist demands from its support base. Failure to find a balanced way may lead NCP to further internal disputes and factionalism, especially between those who are more inclined to secular ideology and those who are to Islamist sentiment. This exactly was what happened to the post-partition Muslim League. Therefore, a clear ideological position is imperative for the party, or an ideological blank slate may result in fragmentation.

About the Author:

Jahidul Islam is an activist and a Master’s student in the Department of Government and Politics in Jahangirnagar University. He can be reached at jahidmn3@gmail.com. For more information, visit Jaahidulislam.com

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect The Insighta's editorial stance. However, any errors in the stated facts or figures may be corrected if supported by verifiable evidence.