Just real quick, something that needs to be cleared up: Is Vaatu stated to be the "spirit of destruction"? I always recall it being chaos as his big push.
And Unalaq bringing back the spirits was a required goal of his, and so in a way it's part of his ideals. If his ideal is "power" and assumed to be nothing more.
Toph's speech always bothered me. Like, how the fuck does she know what Unalaq's up to? He's in the poles, and her vines don't reach that far. I can understand Zaheer and Amon, but Unalaq? Always bugged me.
He's the spirit of darkness and chaos. The darkness part is what makes me think he's a spirit of destruction. I mean, it's kind of random if it literally just means absence of light, so I ought more like "absence of energy", so like a universe where there is no form of light or heat or anything. Hence, destruction. So with moniker's like that, I can't think of what he'd want besides the destruction of the universe.
Power isn't really an ideology. Social Darwinism is an ideology (which Ozai ascribed to), but Unalaq didn't as far as I remember. An ideology is a way of thinking for how the world is or should be. As far as what he said, the world 'should' be spiritually invested or something. His actions reflect that to the extent that he tries to fuse the worlds. Saying his ideology is "Power" doesn't really say anything about that except that it exists.
I agree that Toph somehow knowing this shit is kind of random. Maybe she was listening in to his heartbeat as he talked about this stuff because she has nothing better to do than be the Avatar World's NSA program, but the way it's framed within the show, it's safe to assume she is accurate in what she is talking about.
Oh give me a break. At this point, I can't disagree with anyone without it being a 'rampage' according to you guys. I'm not being aggressive, I'm not saying he's necessarily wrong, I'm not even sure I'm right because I'm arguing that Unalaq doesn't have a consistent characterization that makes sense, and it could be I'm just missing something. I know I can get pretty invested in arguments that explode onto the page, but are you seriously going to tell me that a few paragraphs over 3 (now 4 as of this reply) posts are overblown? You're just overusing the joke at this point and applying it whenever I have a differing opinion. At some point, I will tear this thread a new asshole as I tend to do. Then feel free to derail the conversation with awkwardness. But this? This isn't anything.