Narendra Modi’s rise is not an inheritance of legacy but a break from it—his leadership has redefined Indian politics, blending cultural pride, decisive governance and mass appeal to create what many see as a new political era.
Legacy is a peculiar word. It is often used to discuss political dynasties, political parties, family run businesses and even media entities across the world. Cambridge Dictionary defines legacy as ‘money or property that you receive from someone after they die.’ Social, political, spiritual and, most importantly, economic legacy is passed by our parents to us as inheritance. Then there is the legacy of the Colonial Raj, which we, the children of modern India, have to contend with even today we are still living with the physical, social and cultural remnants of the Raj. Of all legacies, it is political legacy that we focus on, in this chapter.
Since the 1950s, critics of Indian democracy have of ten made predictions about its eventual demise or the fracturing of the social fabric of India. This cynicism is a legacy of the Colonial Raj and continues to haunt political and intellectual discussions even today. The British had the implicit belief that if they left, India would splinter into many halves. This cynicism remained a constant refrain of people of different hues even after Independence. Any attempt at embracing our cultural identity has critics up in arms. They portray it as the secular fabric being in danger of annihilation. However, it is not our secular fabric that is in danger but our cultural identity steeped in our collective pasts.
At the base of the Indian democracy lies its resilience, which was forged during the freedom struggle and remains its most defining feature. Narendra Damodar das Modi, the current prime minister of India, unlike his predecessors Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi, Lal Bahadur Shastri, Rajiv Gandhi and P.V. Narsimha Rao, is not a product of Nehruvian consensus. Neither is he is an inheritor of legacy that represented many of his predecessors such as Lal Bahadur Shastri, Moraji Desai, Chandra Shekhar, P.V. Narasimha Rao or even Atal Bihar Vajpayee. With the exception of Vajpayee, all of them were a product of the ‘Congress system’ in one form or the other, whether directly or indirectly. This system, as defined by historian Rajni Kothari, represented a broad consensus that pre vailed until the 1970s. In contrast is PM Modi, a man not given to cynicism and one who doesn’t believe in abandoning his identity. He has a strong sense of cultural pride, which draws heavily from India’s civilisational past. But it is important to understand the background behind the transformation of the cultural, social and political fabric of the nation under PM Modi’s leadership.
The decade of 2004–2014 was a watershed moment in contemporary Indian history. From the nuclear deal with the United States to the Mumbai attacks, the Anna Hazare movement and the Commonwealth Games fiasco, this decade witnessed a combination of domestic political turmoil and external upheavals. However, what came to be most associated with this decade was policy paralysis, scams and allegations of corruption at the highest levels. The ruling dispensation seemed adrift, and the middle class, youth and urban voters were disenchanted. This environment created the fertile ground for the rise of Narendra Modi.
The Bharatiya Janata Party was struggling after the 2004 defeat. Its stalwarts Atal Bihari Vajpayee and L.K. Advani were ageing, and the party lacked a charismatic leader to counter the Congress. Modi, then the chief minister of Gujarat, had already made a mark with his governance model, his ability to communicate directly with the masses and his organisational skills. The Gujarat riots of 2002, though controversial, paradoxically cemented his image as a strong leader in the eyes of many within his party and voter base. By 2013, Modi emerged as the prime ministerial candidate of the BJP, overcoming internal resistance and galvanising the cadre.
The 2014 elections were a turning point in Indian politics. Modi’s campaign was unprecedented in its scale, ambition and use of technology. The narrative of ‘Achhe Din’, combined with promises of development, jobs and good governance, struck a chord with voters across caste, class and region. The campaign’s reliance on social media, 3D holograms and direct communication with the electorate marked a departure from traditional methods. Modi positioned himself as an outsider to the Delhi establishment, a man of humble origins who understood the aspirations of ordinary Indians.
Global media framed Modi’s 2014 victory as another tryst with destiny, akin to the moment of Independence in 1947. The Economist de- scribed him as India’s most powerful leader in decades, while Time magazine put him on its cover as ‘India’s Divider in Chief’ even as it ac- knowledged his transformative potential. Domestically, the verdict was clear: for the first time in thirty years, a single party had won a ma- jority on its own. Modi had not only revived the BJP but also redefined the contours of Indian politics.
In his first term, Modi launched a slew of initiatives aimed at governance reform and social welfare. The Jan Dhan Yojana, Ujjwala scheme, Swachh Bharat Abhiyan and Digital India became signature programmes that impacted millions of lives. These schemes were not just about service delivery but about instilling a sense of dignity among the poor. Modi’s emphasis on direct benefit transfer, Aadhaar-linked subsidies and financial inclusion re- duced leakages and brought transparency.
Foreign policy under Modi also witnessed a departure from the past. His energetic outreach to world lead- ers, from Barack Obama to Shinzo Abe and Xi Jinping, signalled a more assertive India. Modi’s emphasis on the Indian diaspora as a force multiplier was evident in his Madison Square Garden event in New York in 2014, which showcased his ability to connect with Indians abroad. The Act East policy, focus on the Indo-Pacific and strong stance against terror- ism reflected a pragmatic and interest-driven approach.
The cultural dimension of Modi’s politics was equally significant. The construction of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir, and criminalisation of triple talaq were landmark moves that fulfilled longstanding ideological commitments of the BJP and RSS. These decisions were not just legal or political but civilisational in their symbolism. They represented a break from the Nehruvian consensus and an assertion of cultural nationalism.
Comparisons between Modi and earlier prime ministers are inevitable. Nehru built institutions and laid the foundations of parliamenta- ry democracy, Indira Gandhi centralised power and redefined executive authority, Narasimha Rao liberalised the economy, and Vajpayee combined governance with a consensual style. Modi, however, stands apart in his ability to combine mass appeal with decisive governance. His political communication is unmatched, his command over the party unparalleled, and his ability to set the na- tional agenda unrivalled. Critics argue that Modi’s leadership style is overly centralised, that institutions have been weakened, and that dissent is stifled. They point to rising majoritarianism, curbs on freedom of expression and the shrinking space for opposition. Sup- porters counter that Modi has democratised politics by breaking the dominance of dynastic elites, given voice to the aspirations of ordinary citizens and instilled pride in India’s civilisational heritage. The 2019 elections further cemented Modi’s dominance. Winning an even larger mandate, he proved that 2014 was not an aberration but the beginning of a new political era. The Pulwama attack and Balakot airstrikes showcased his muscular approach to national security, which resonated with the electorate. Welfare schemes like PM-Kisan, Ayushman Bharat and continued emphasis on infrastructure development reinforced his pro-poor image.
The BJP under Modi has transformed into the world’s largest political party with a membership base exceeding 180 million. Organisation- ally, it has become a formidable electoral machine, winning state after state and expanding its footprint in regions where it was once weak. Modi’s ability to connect with the cadre, energise the grassroots and inspire loyalty is unmatched. One of Modi’s key strengths has been his legalistic approach to contentious issues. The abrogation of Article 370 was carried out with meticulous planning, legal safeguards and political management. The Ram Temple issue, pending for decades, was resolved through a Supreme Court verdict fol- lowed by decisive govern- ment action. The triple talaq legislation, though contested, was passed in Parliament af- ter sustained effort. This reliance on constitutional and legal mechanisms reflects Modi’s respect for institutional processes even as he pursues transformational change. The relationship between Modi and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) is complex. While rooted in the same ideological uni- verse, Modi has carved out his own space, often pri- oritising governance and pragmatism over dogma.
His ability to balance the RSS’s expectations with the demands of governance has been a hallmark of his leader- ship. The RSS, in turn, recognises Modi’s unparalleled mass appeal and has largely supported his agenda. Internationally, Modi has positioned India as a rising power. His emphasis on climate change, renewable energy and initiatives like the International Solar Alliance highlight India’s role as a responsible global actor. His personal diplomacy, from bear hugs to first-name terms with world leaders, reflects a new style of engage- ment. Yet, his foreign policy remains firmly anchored in national interest, whether in dealing with China’s aggression or deepening ties with the United States.
As Modi’s tenure progresses, the question of legacy looms large. Unlike Nehru, whose legacy was institution-building, or In- dira Gandhi, whose legacy was centralisation of power, Modi’s legacy is about transformation. He has sought to dismantle the old order and build a new one rooted in civilisational pride, economic dynamism and political assertiveness. Whether this legacy endures will depend on its ability to deliver inclusive growth, maintain social harmony and sustain democratic institutions. Historians in the future will likely study Indian politics in two phases—before Modi and after Modi. Such has been the impact of his leadership on the political, social and cultural fabric of the nation. For his supporters, Modi represents the aspirations of a New India confident, assertive and rooted in its identity. For his critics, he represents a departure from the pluralist ethos of the republic. Either way, Modi has redefined the terms of political discourse in India.
