This paper introduces politics and power into the multi-level perspective (MLP) to analyze resistance by incumbent regime actors to low-carbon transitions. While most studies focus on green niche-innovations, this paper highlights the resistance of fossil fuel regimes (coal, gas, nuclear) that currently negate the benefits of increasing renewable energy deployment. It argues that policymakers and transition scholars have overly optimistic views about the sufficiency of 'green' innovation for low-carbon transitions. Future research and policy should focus more on the destabilization and decline of fossil fuel regimes. The MLP framework considers transitions as arising from the interplay between three levels: niches (innovations), regimes (established practices), and the socio-technical landscape. However, the MLP has been criticized for neglecting power and politics in policy development and for conceptualizing regimes as monolithic barriers. This paper instead conceptualizes regime stability as the result of active resistance by incumbent actors, using instrumental, discursive, material, and institutional forms of power and resistance. The UK electricity sector is used as a case study, where coal, gas, and nuclear regimes have resisted low-carbon transitions. Despite ambitious climate targets, coal use has increased, and nuclear and gas have been repositioned as low-carbon alternatives. The paper illustrates how regime actors use power to resist change, including through discursive strategies that shape public agendas, material strategies that improve technical capabilities, and institutional strategies that embed resistance in political culture and governance. The paper also discusses how the political dimensions of these preferences are masked by a 'post-political' discourse that frames climate change as a techno-economic challenge. This has led to a focus on large-scale technical solutions rather than alternative transition pathways. The paper argues that understanding and addressing regime resistance is crucial for effective low-carbon transitions, as existing regimes hinder progress. It calls for a shift in research and policy to focus on both stimulating 'green' innovations and destabilizing fossil fuel regimes, emphasizing the 'destruction' aspect of Schumpeter's 'creative destruction' concept. The paper concludes that socio-political struggles with fossil fuel companies will be crucial in achieving low-carbon transitions.This paper introduces politics and power into the multi-level perspective (MLP) to analyze resistance by incumbent regime actors to low-carbon transitions. While most studies focus on green niche-innovations, this paper highlights the resistance of fossil fuel regimes (coal, gas, nuclear) that currently negate the benefits of increasing renewable energy deployment. It argues that policymakers and transition scholars have overly optimistic views about the sufficiency of 'green' innovation for low-carbon transitions. Future research and policy should focus more on the destabilization and decline of fossil fuel regimes. The MLP framework considers transitions as arising from the interplay between three levels: niches (innovations), regimes (established practices), and the socio-technical landscape. However, the MLP has been criticized for neglecting power and politics in policy development and for conceptualizing regimes as monolithic barriers. This paper instead conceptualizes regime stability as the result of active resistance by incumbent actors, using instrumental, discursive, material, and institutional forms of power and resistance. The UK electricity sector is used as a case study, where coal, gas, and nuclear regimes have resisted low-carbon transitions. Despite ambitious climate targets, coal use has increased, and nuclear and gas have been repositioned as low-carbon alternatives. The paper illustrates how regime actors use power to resist change, including through discursive strategies that shape public agendas, material strategies that improve technical capabilities, and institutional strategies that embed resistance in political culture and governance. The paper also discusses how the political dimensions of these preferences are masked by a 'post-political' discourse that frames climate change as a techno-economic challenge. This has led to a focus on large-scale technical solutions rather than alternative transition pathways. The paper argues that understanding and addressing regime resistance is crucial for effective low-carbon transitions, as existing regimes hinder progress. It calls for a shift in research and policy to focus on both stimulating 'green' innovations and destabilizing fossil fuel regimes, emphasizing the 'destruction' aspect of Schumpeter's 'creative destruction' concept. The paper concludes that socio-political struggles with fossil fuel companies will be crucial in achieving low-carbon transitions.