Besesayo Kezo, IPS, Retd. DGP
Nagaland exemplifies a distinctive facet of contemporary Indian democracy. On numerous occasions—most notably in 2015, 2021, and after the 2023 Assembly elections—political factions across the ideological spectrum, including the NDPP, BJP, and NPF, as well as various independent and minor-party MLAs, conspired to form what are often called “all-party” or “opposition-less” administrations.
While proponents present this as a step towards consensus and stability, and as a means to expedite peace negotiations on the Naga Political Issue, classical Greek political philosophy suggests that such practices undermine the principles of ethical governance and emphasise the importance of moral integrity over personal interests.
1. Plato: Pleonexia and the Illusion of Unity
In the Republic, Plato warned against pleonexia—the unjust desire for more than one’s share, driven by material greed and political ambition rather than by civic duty (arete).
• Deception of “Unity”: In Nagaland, politicians often justify defection or joining the ruling fold under the banner of “unanimity for the Naga peace process.” From a Platonic perspective, when elected representatives abandon their party identities and electoral mandates to share in executive power, “unity” becomes a rhetorical veil masking opportunistic self-preservation.
• Betrayal of the Social Contract: Plato argued that a just society depends on each element performing its designated function. When opposition legislators abandon their role as guardians of public accountability to enjoy the perks of the treasury benches, the democratic structure breaks down, pushing the state towards an oligarchy ruled by self-serving elites.
2. Aristotle: The Loss of Dialectic and the Danger of Stasis
Aristotle’s Politics emphasises that a healthy state requires a mixed constitution in which opposing forces challenge and balance one another through open debate.
• Erosion of Parrhesia (Fearless Speech): With no formal opposition in the Nagaland Legislative Assembly, there is no institutional mechanism to scrutinise government spending, audit public infrastructure, or challenge policy failures. When all 60 MLAs align with the ruling establishment, legislative debate gives way to passive concurrence.
• The Decay into Factional Oligarchy: Aristotle warned that governments without institutional checks cease to rule for the common good (politeia) and instead devolve into factions that rule for private gain. Depriving citizens of an alternative political voice does not eliminate discontent; it merely suppresses public expression, thereby increasing the risk of covert factionalism and long-term civic instability (stasis).
3. The Ethical Imperative: Why Opposition is Essential
Applying ancient political thought to Nagaland’s political reality underscores why an opposition-less government is fundamentally anti-democratic and unethical:
• Disenfranchisement of the Electorate: Voters elect opposition candidates to hold the ruling power accountable. When elected opposition leaders switch sides after the election, without voter consent, the ballot box becomes meaningless.
• Normalised Corruption: In the absence of an opposition to audit state resources and raise questions on the Assembly floor, institutional oversight weakens, creating an environment prone to unmonitored patronage and systemic leakage.
• Institutional Atrophy: Democracy thrives on constitutional friction. Without an active opposition party that offers an alternative vision for governance, political discourse stagnates, leaving citizens without meaningful choices.
“A state that becomes increasingly one will cease to be a state at all; for a state is by its nature a plurality.” — Aristotle, Politics
Conclusion: In Nagaland, replacing democratic opposition with political consensus often fails to achieve genuine peace or meaningful progress. As classical philosophy notes, eliminating checks and balances can undermine democratic institutions, distancing leaders from the people they serve. This shift can also create opportunities for plutocracy and oligarchy, endangering the core values of equality that many cherish.
