Every political era eventually acquires a name. “Modi-ism” is India’s name for the political and governing order built around Narendra Modi: A commanding leader, disciplined party organisation, civilisational assertion, centralised decision-making, technology-driven welfare, infrastructure-led development, high-energy national security and direct communication with citizens. It is a method of acquiring power, exercising authority and defining the nation. Its central promise is unmistakable: A strong leader, a purposeful state and a stronger India.
Its political achievement cannot be disputed. Modi transformed the BJP from a major national formation into the central axis of Indian politics. He expanded it beyond its traditional geographical and social constituencies and made leadership itself the principal electoral proposition. In 2024, however, the BJP fell to 240 seats and required its NDA partners to form the government. That verdict did not reject Modi. It qualified his mandate. The country chose continuity, but also restored the relevance of consultation, coalition and restraint.
Modi-ism has produced visible public gains. Infrastructure construction, digital public platforms, direct benefit transfers, financial inclusion, sanitation, housing, electrification and welfare delivery at scale have strengthened the state’s capacity to reach citizens. It has also contained somewhat the undue proliferation of regional politics. NITI Aayog estimated multidimensional poverty at 11.28 per cent in 2022-23, compared with 29.17 per cent in 2013-14. The methodology may be debated, but the improvement in delivery cannot honestly be dismissed.
Its appeal rests equally on political clarity. Modi-ism speaks in the language of aspiration, national confidence and civilisational recovery. For citizens long frustrated by delay, indecision and fragmented authority, a government promising speed and scale has obvious appeal.
Yet effectiveness cannot be the only test of democratic government.
The more consequential question is whether Modi-ism remains securely anchored in the country’s constitutional settlement. Its critics allege that the Modi era seeks to weaken pluralism, dilute socialism, replace rights with governmental charity, capture institutions and ultimately alter the Constitution. Its supporters dismiss these charges as partisan hostility towards Modi or resistance to India’s cultural resurgence.
Both positions are too absolute. The constitutional character of a government must be judged through the actual exercise of power, not through slogans or unevidenced perceptions.
Elections continue to be fiercely competitive. Governments change in the states. Opposition parties govern substantial parts of the country. Courts continue to examine executive action and enforce fundamental rights. In November 2024, the Supreme Court rejected petitions challenging the inclusion of “socialist” and “secular” in the Preamble. It would therefore be inaccurate to claim that the country’s constitutional order has been dismantled.
But a Constitution can be weakened without its words being formally deleted. Institutions may remain intact on paper while their independence, credibility and conventions erode. Democracy is sustained not merely by periodic elections, but by restraints on power, respect for dissent, parliamentary accountability, federal balance and equal citizenship.
The concern about pluralism is not that religious freedom has been legally abolished. It is that majoritarian mobilisation and inflammatory language can make minorities feel conditionally accepted. Cultural nationalism is constitutionally legitimate; cultural supremacy is not.
The country may proudly acknowledge its Hindu civilisational inheritance. But the republic belongs, without qualification, to every citizen. Equal citizenship cannot depend upon religion, political loyalty or conformity with a preferred account of national identity.
Socialism also requires a more intelligent debate. Our constitutional socialism does not demand a return to the licence-permit raj, hostility to private enterprise or indiscriminate state ownership. It requires social and economic justice, equality of opportunity and protection against degrading deprivation.
Many Modi-era welfare programmes advance these constitutional purposes. The problem begins when statutory entitlements are politically presented as personal gifts from a leader. Food support, employment guarantees, housing, scholarships and social security are not acts of generosity. They are public obligations, financed by citizens and delivered under law.
Rights-based governance must, therefore, complement, not be displaced by, beneficiary politics. Technology can reduce leakage and accelerate delivery. But citizens excluded by failed authentication, inaccurate databases or administrative discretion must have accessible remedies. Welfare requires enforceable standards, grievance redress, social audits and legislative scrutiny.
A citizen must remain a rights-holder, not be reduced to a grateful beneficiary.
The allegation of institutional capture must similarly be examined with evidence rather than rhetoric. Every elected government is entitled to govern, make lawful appointments and implement its programme. But institutional autonomy depends not merely upon technical legality. It also requires transparent appointments, procedural fairness and visible distance from partisan command.
Here the record raises legitimate concerns. During the seventeenth Lok Sabha, 58 per cent of bills were passed within two weeks of introduction, and only 16 per cent were referred to parliamentary committees. On average, around 80 per cent of the Union Budget was voted without discussion between 2019 and 2023.
The SC decision striking down the electoral bond scheme established that secrecy in political funding had crossed a constitutional boundary. The law governing the appointment of election commissioners, which gives the executive a majority on the selection committee, has similarly raised concerns about perceived independence. These concerns do not establish that every institution has been captured. But they demonstrate why independence must be protected not only in fact, but also in public perception.
Should Modi-ism continue? Its productive core should.
The country needs decisive and strong leadership, national confidence, infrastructure, digital innovation, credible defence capability and measurable delivery. But Modi-ism must now evolve from leader-centred mobilisation into institution-centred nation-building.
That transition requires clear corrections. Parliament must recover serious deliberation, committee scrutiny and control over public expenditure. Federal consultation must precede major decisions affecting the states. Appointments to constitutional and regulatory bodies should command cross-party credibility. Investigative agencies must be demonstrably even-handed. Welfare delivery must be joined to enforceable rights. Political discourse must replace habitual polarisation with constitutional fraternity. Development’s next phase must create productive employment, competitive manufacturing, stronger small enterprises, higher farm incomes, quality public education, accessible healthcare, liveable cities and climate resilience.
The BJP itself must institutionalise its success. No durable national party can remain indefinitely dependent upon one personality, however formidable. It needs empowered ministers, credible regional leaders, internal debate and an orderly culture of succession.
Modi-ism has given India energy, ambition and a stronger international voice. Its historical value, however, will not be measured by one leader’s dominance or one party’s electoral reach. The choice is not between Modi and the Constitution. It is between a Modi-ism disciplined by the Constitution, and one that seeks to rise above it.
The country does not need a weaker government. It needs strong leadership restrained by stronger institutions, serving citizens who are equal in dignity, secure in their rights and confident in their common future.
The writer, former chief minister of Punjab, is in the BJP
Prime Minister Narendra Modi during the 80th Independence Day celebrations, at Red Fort in New Delhi. (Credits: Tashi Tobgyal) 
Share
