When crowds thronged Delhi’s Jantar Mantar to back social activist Anna Hazare’s anti-corruption movement in 2011, few believed the protests would give birth to a political alternative promising transparent, clean and people-centric governance. The formation of the Aam Aadmi Party was therefore widely welcomed by those disenchanted with traditional politics.
But over a decade later, the AAP is no longer the idealistic force it set out to be. Instead, it has joined the ranks of the very parties it once denounced. The party’s journey from those heady days to the present has been chronicled by journalist Sayantan Ghosh in his book The Aam Aadmi Party: Uprising and its Undoing. Having closely observed the party as a political reporter and briefly worked with then Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia, Ghosh offers insights into AAP’s rapid rise and decline.
The book traces how a group of activists, led by Arvind Kejriwal, made the unusual move into electoral politics. It captures the enthusiasm with which AAP was embraced by Delhi voters, culminating in its sweeping victory in the 2015 assembly elections. Initially, Kejriwal retained his combative activist persona, but he shifted focus when voters signalled a preference for governance over confrontation with the Centre.
Kejriwal turned to core issues like education and healthcare, alongside populist measures such as subsidised electricity and water, and free bus rides for women. These policies resonated in a city where identity politics plays a limited role. As Ghosh notes, this “strategic use of popular policies” helped cement Kejriwal’s image as a leader focused on immediate public needs. At the same time, the party saw increasing centralisation of power under Kejriwal, with dissenting voices sidelined and decision-making concentrated. The early idealism gradually gave way to the compulsions of realpolitik.
Ghosh describes this shift as “a cautionary tale” of how a movement of idealists can transform into a party driven by the ambitions of a single leader. According to him, several government initiatives were “clouded by irregularities and corruption,” reflecting a gap between intent and execution. Controversies such as the liquor excise policy and the renovation of Kejriwal’s official residence further dented the party’s image. Kejriwal’s arrest marked a turning point, severely impacting his credibility. In 2025 Delhi election, the AAP lost power, and Kejriwal lost his seat.
Despite his proximity to the party, Ghosh avoids both glorification and vilification. While acknowledging Kejriwal’s charisma, he highlights his tendency to suppress dissent, including the expulsion of founding members Yogendra Yadav and Prashant Bhushan.
The AAP story ultimately raises a larger question: whether a political alternative can sustain itself without compromising on its founding ideals.