Modi’s India has shed baggage of Nehruvian socialism

The year 2014 marked a new beginning in the history of post-independent India. A new set of people with an alternative narrative to define India’s nationalism, culture, federalism, secularism and development received a thumping mandate. It was also a rejection of the old model of governance and social philosophy which the earlier regime pursued.  

This was well acknowledged by the British newspaper The Guardian soon after the election results. In its editorial on May 18, 2014,  it wrote that this “may well go down in history as the day when Britain finally left India”. It further elaborated that after the transfer of power in 1947, the same colonial political culture and social philosophy, as well as the same structures, have continued to dominate governance in the country. This was a farsighted critical forecast about the new regime. Three years of Modi government vindicates The Guardian’s envisioned editorial. 

It has been a history of change, reforms and radical corrections. Democracy remains symbolic as long as the rulers are privileged with elitist status and mindset. The latest decision of the government to abolish the use of red beacons on vehicles ended the extra-legal and social status claimed by thousands in the elite club consisting of ministers, judges, and others. It is preceded by the insistence of PM Modi to ministers to not employ relatives and caste men in their staff.  These are small decisions but have a far-reaching impact on the political culture, and go a long way in boosting substantive democracy. 

But the most critical step was demonetization which, besides downsizing the black money market, disseminated the message that there is an Indian State, whose hegemony has been resurrected by Modi beyond the impact of private capital and market. Demonetization was a referendum for welfare state and Modi led the first and the biggest economic Satyagraha. 

Meanwhile, Modinomics has emerged as a force to be reckoned with. It has three dimensions. First, the state must reach the poor and the marginalised sans the middlemen. Essentially, the poor should get subsidies; connect with the banking system; should enjoy convenient insurance, and gas connections should reach their kitchens.    

Second, there should be wealth creation. Modinomics believes in generating wealth which can boost infrastructure and welfare measures. Earlier regimes failed to create wealth and despite their intention to benefit the poor, they could not move beyond populism. 

Third, Modinomics seeks to bring in beneficial capital from the international market and explore cultural capital in contrast to crude capital. New development partners know very well that India cannot be exploited and its economic sovereignty cannot be undermined. 

Also, Modi represents an ideological movement whose narrative on nationalism is rooted in the Indian soil, history and has a civilizational trajectory. It gives India an identity which is much more than a nation state — that of a civilizational nation.  

The biggest outrage against Indian democracy and secularism has been perpetuated by a majority-minority division that has undermined the message of the Constituent Assembly. 

Modi has firmly rejected such divisions and its outcome is evident. Modi’s pursuit of the secularisation of governance and discourse faces two roadblocks. The first is the remaining vestiges of the old system against which he has been fighting, and the second being euro-centric and Marxist intellectuals who have dominated the national discourse under State patronage.  

The latter have been creating noise and giving ideological and communal colour to any undesirable incident, and in their misadventures, they often ironically solicit support from their counterparts in the western world. This is not far-fetched. History will attest to the fact that all transformations have been resisted by supporters of old regimes. 

And the last, Modi, to his credit, has also restored the credibility and confidence of the Indian Army, which has been under attack by forces inimical to India. And unfortunately, many of these forces have been legitimised by some Indian political actors and parties.  

To sum it up, the message is clear and loud in the last three years both for domestic and international audience that, ‘India’s postal address is not Nehru, it’s Modi’.

The author is founding Honorary Director of India Policy Foundation, a Delhi-based think tank