THE GREAT INDIAN DEBATE — DAY 31 Is Modi India’s most effective PM or its most divisive?
THE STAKES Last month, the Supreme Court’s verdict on the electoral bonds scheme reignited the debate over transparency in governance—one of many fault lines in Narendra Modi’s decade-long tenure. As the 2024 election campaign heats up, his supporters hail him as the architect of India’s rise, while critics warn of democratic backsliding. The question isn’t just about Modi’s legacy; it’s about what kind of India we want: a muscular, centralized state or a plural, decentralized republic. The answer will shape everything from federalism to free speech for decades.
THE ARGUMENT FOR: MODI IS INDIA’S MOST EFFECTIVE PM Proponents of this view argue that Modi’s leadership has delivered tangible results where previous governments failed. Economically, India’s GDP growth has averaged 6.5% under his tenure, outpacing most major economies. Infrastructure projects—highways, airports, metro networks—have expanded at an unprecedented pace, with the National Infrastructure Pipeline committing ₹111 lakh crore to development. The UPI payment system, launched in 2016, now processes over 10 billion transactions monthly, revolutionizing digital finance.
On foreign policy, Modi has elevated India’s global stature. The G20 presidency in 2023 showcased India as a bridge between the Global North and South, while the Quad alliance (with the US, Japan, and Australia) counters China’s influence in the Indo-Pacific. Domestically, the abrogation of Article 370 in 2019 and the construction of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya fulfilled long-standing demands of his political base, reinforcing his image as a decisive leader.
Supporters also credit him with welfare schemes that have reached millions: the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (housing for the poor), Ayushman Bharat (health insurance), and the Ujjwala Yojana (free LPG connections). These programs, they argue, have reduced poverty and improved living standards, particularly in rural India. The government’s push for self-reliance (Atmanirbhar Bharat) during the pandemic, including vaccine production and distribution, is cited as evidence of effective crisis management.
Constitutionally, Modi’s defenders point to the implementation of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) as structural reforms that previous governments hesitated to undertake. They argue that his leadership has restored faith in governance after decades of coalition-era paralysis and corruption scandals.
THE ARGUMENT AGAINST: MODI IS INDIA’S MOST DIVISIVE PM Critics contend that Modi’s tenure has deepened societal fractures, eroded institutional independence, and prioritized majoritarian politics over inclusive governance. The 2002 Gujarat riots, which occurred under his watch as chief minister, remain a stain on his record, with human rights groups alleging state complicity in violence against Muslims. While he was cleared by the Supreme Court in 2013, the episode set the tone for his national leadership, where religious polarization has become a recurring theme.
Economically, opponents argue that Modi’s policies have favored big business at the expense of the poor. Demonetization in 2016, intended to curb black money, crippled small businesses and informal workers, with the RBI later reporting that 99% of the demonetized currency returned to the system. Unemployment has remained stubbornly high, with the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE) estimating youth unemployment at over 20% in 2023. The farm laws, repealed after massive protests in 2021, were seen as a top-down imposition that ignored rural concerns.
On democratic norms, critics highlight the shrinking space for dissent. The use of sedition laws, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), and raids on opposition leaders and media houses have raised concerns about authoritarianism. The Election Commission’s perceived bias, the suppression of student protests (e.g., JNU in 2020), and the passage of contentious laws like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) have fueled fears of a majoritarian state. The Supreme Court’s recent electoral bonds verdict, which called the scheme "unconstitutional," underscored the erosion of transparency under Modi’s watch.
Foreign policy, too, has been divisive. The government’s handling of China’s incursions in Ladakh (2020) and the Galwan clash, which resulted in Indian soldier deaths, exposed strategic vulnerabilities. The CAA and the National Register of Citizens (NRC) have stoked fears of statelessness among Muslims, while the revocation of Kashmir’s special status has led to prolonged internet shutdowns and political repression in the region.
Constitutionally, opponents argue that Modi’s government has undermined federalism by centralizing power. The use of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against opposition-ruled states, the imposition of President’s Rule in states like Maharashtra (2019), and the bypassing of Rajya Sabha on key bills (e.g., farm laws) have weakened India’s federal structure.
THE HIDDEN DIMENSION: THE ECONOMICS OF POLARIZATION Most debates about Modi’s legacy focus on ideology or governance, but the underlying driver is economic anxiety. India’s growth story has been uneven: while the top 10% of the population holds over 57% of the wealth (Oxfam 2023), the bottom 50% struggles with stagnant wages and job insecurity. Modi’s policies—from GST to demonetization—have disproportionately hurt the informal sector, which employs 80% of India’s workforce.
This economic precarity makes identity politics a potent tool. When livelihoods are uncertain, cultural grievances—real or imagined—become easier to exploit. The BJP’s rise coincides with the decline of traditional industries (textiles, agriculture) and the rise of gig work, creating a generation of young Indians who feel left behind. Modi’s appeal lies in his ability to channel this anxiety into a narrative of national pride, where economic hardship is framed as a temporary sacrifice for a "New India."
The hidden dimension, then, is that polarization isn’t just about religion or ideology—it’s about who benefits from India’s growth. As long as economic inequality persists, the debate over Modi’s legacy will remain a proxy for deeper questions: Who is India for? And who gets to decide?
WHERE INDIANS STAND Polling data suggests a divided electorate. A 2023 Pew Research survey found that 79% of Indians have a favorable view of Modi, but this support is sharply polarized along religious lines: 88% of Hindus approve of him, compared to 57% of Muslims. The 2019 general election saw the BJP win 37% of the vote, its highest ever, but regional parties and opposition alliances have since gained ground in state elections, indicating that Modi’s popularity is not monolithic.
YOUR VIEW If Modi’s effectiveness is measured by economic growth and infrastructure, but his divisiveness by democratic backsliding and social fractures, which metric should weigh more in judging a prime minister’s legacy?