As far as the ‘villagescape’ is concerned, the mechanism of the functioning of the village council plays a very important and decisive role in mandating participation, any reform or political action, and, to a large extent, even internalising the attitudes, ideologies and value systems of political parties. There is a well-articulated relationship between the village councils or village development boards and candidates intending to contest. Often, the power dynamic present within the village councils paves the way for determining who emerges as the ‘consensus candidate’. This does not imply that individual choice is negated in this scheme but that the clan and village dynamics greatly impact the nature of political obligation. Many times, there have been village conflicts, both intra-clan and inter-clan, when members have voted against a particular candidate whom the clan had decided to support. Even in the last elections of 2018, the village councils played a decisive role in dictating the terms of choice to villagers. Individual equations, then, are contested against the stronger and more solidified community/clan/village loyalties, themselves incumbent upon each other. Contrastingly, in urban spaces like Dimapur and Kohima, which are much more cosmopolitan, clan and village dynamics do not have much say in determining the choice of candidate and the social pressure to vote for a particular candidate is not as strong; the culture of politics in the towns is much more democratic in nature and allows for individual choice. Here, the principles of party ideology play a much more consequential role.