“India has seen the dream of a Congress-mukt Bharat,” Narendra Modi said at a Delhi rally six months before taking over as PM in 2014.Two years later, his then-party president Amit Shah proclaimed that the government had taken ‘two steps closer’ to a Congress-mukt Bharat. Rajnath Singh, the senior-most minister after the duo, claimed while the BJP is ‘a party with a difference’, others were all ‘parties with (internal) differences’.It apparently meant that while the BJP remained a disciplined party with its workers tamely following the bosses’ dictates, Congress workers often questioned the merits of their leaders’ judgements.Shah came out with another thesis: Modi, he said, has adopted a ‘bottom-to-top’ approach in decision-making. It is a preposterous claim. In fact, Modi in his early years as PM had established total control over the entire government apparatus and party organisation.He had muzzled all watchdog or strictly autonomous bodies like the National Statistical Office, Central Information Commission, Central Vigilance Commission and the Comptroller and Auditor General by appointing loyal nominees to them. RBI governor Urjit Patel’s troubles with Modi are legion. In his initial years, Modi had even asked the secretaries to directly report to the PMO, thus short cutting their ministers. This is what Shah now describes as ‘bottom-top decision-making’.Take Rajnath Singh’s claim of the BJP being a ‘party with a difference’. In the 1980s and early ’90s, the BJP used the term to distinguish itself from the top-heavy decision-making style of the Congress under Indira Gandhi. Those were days when the BJP’s organisational bodies, like the central executive committee (CEC) and national council (NC) were functioning bodies. The CEC met every quarter and debated policies and government decisions.At times, decisions were reversed after discussions. However, under Modi, the CEC’s role is confined to just listening to the homilies of the top bosses. Nothing more. No discussion or debate. Therefore, Modi cannot claim any credit for the days when the BJP functioned as a ‘party with a difference’ or with a ‘bottom-to-top decision-making’ style.The Modi team from day one has been assiduously working on a three-pronged strategy: working towards a ‘Congress-mukt Bharat’ or eliminating the opposition, swallowing up NDA allies, and promoting a Modi-centric cult-driven echo system. A closer look will show that every decision by, every project of and every pronouncement by this regime has been in tune with this playbook.Apologists of Modi often contrast the ‘party of discipline’ with the unruly and rebellious members of the opposition. Aimed at highlighting the presumed superiority of Modi’s leadership, this is also aimed at creating a narrative of the failing opposition and the ever-winning Modi. The media establishments are persuaded to provide the right logistical support.TV channels and online, print and social media go the whole hog to drum up support for this theme. Thus internal tussles in the Congress became usual fare for the mainstream media.Last month, a prominent multi-edition daily ran a story detailing the internal ‘quarrels’ in various state units of the Congress. In the recent past NDTV, for instance, also carried a similar story mocking the infightings in the Congress and other opposition parties as well as among them. Elections to the Rajya Sabha this year were a really delicious fare for the opposition-baiters.The All India Congress Committee session last year was a heaven-sent opportunity for the godi media. In a speculative piece, an analyst predicted nothing would come of it, and in another article narrated differences among the leaders on almost every issue.When it comes to the meetings of BJP’s CEC or NC, the same media establishments obediently confine themselves to the official fact-sheet. No critical comments. If at all, you can praise Shah’s wisdom in taking decisions.Last year, sections of the media came out with stories like ‘Priyanka lao Congress bachao’ (‘bring Priyanka [Gandhi] and save the Congress’]. This was, obviously, aimed at sowing the seeds of suspicion among the Congress ranks. Another inspired story compared how suitable the two are to lead the Congress. However, such insinuations were promptly contradicted by traditional Congress analysts.The media is encouraged to highlight the disarray in the opposition. They are constantly provided the right clues against the Congress and other opposition parties. Often, BJP contacts provide background to help the media. For instance, when Sonia Gandhi questioned the government’s silence on Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s assassination, sections of the media quickly came out with a ‘whatabout’ counter to her on the then-Congress government’s response to Saddam Hussein’s killing.Tussles in the Karnataka Congress have been a perennial topic. If you do not have anything for the day, do a Karnataka dissidence story. It will yield at least a double-column in the print media and the days’ lead topic for TV channels with appropriate visuals. Stories on opposition disarray and indiscipline always get special treatment in mass media under Modi.Look at the case of internal elections. The BJP bosses are against any kind of inner-party debates at its organisational bodies except those by MoSha’s trusted few. The top two pick the nominees and everyone is expected to endorse them.It is this complex that makes them see red even in legitimate activities like airing differences of opinion at party forums and contesting elections as per the party constitution. Hence they dub such activities as indiscipline and unruly behaviour.What we find is a play of two different political cultures and democratic traditions. While the post-2014 BJP follows a tightly controlled inverted pyramid power structure, the Congress has been desperately trying to retain its old organisational heritage and inner-party practices like fearless criticism of deviations from accepted policies.As for the Congress, barring a brief period, its rank and file had always exercised their democratic rights to participate in internal elections. In 1996, Sharad Pawar and Rajesh Pilot unsuccessfully contested against the official candidate Sitaram Kesri. In 2000, Jitendra Prasada contested against Sonia Gandhi for the Congress presidency.Shashi Tharoor was keeping this tradition when he threw the gauntlet against the official candidate Mallikarjun Karge in 2022. The likes of BJP IT cell Amit Malviya had described it as a challenge against the official leadership. “We don’t need your involvement in our party’s election,” Tharoor retorted. He challenged the BJP leadership to hold their own internal elections.After the results, Tharoor, in true democratic tradition, said: “It is a privilege to be a member of a party that allows its workers to choose their president.” He said he believes the revival of the party has “truly” begun. “Under his [Kharge’s] guidance, I am confident that we can all collectively take the party to new heights,” Tharoor said.In the election. Kharge had got 7,897 votes (84.14%). Tharoor was able to score a respectable 1,072 (11.4%). All this is to highlight the contrast between the dictatorial style and practices followed by the BJP under Modi and what he calls a dynastic party. The Congress system is not perfect. But still it retains certain elements of democratic functioning.This is not the case with Modi’s BJP. What happened in 2014 was not just the return of the BJP to power. It marked the advent of a system with the concentration of power in the Modi-Shah duo. In the process, it also destroyed the BJP’s own collective decision-making system. The twosome, in consultation with their non-political specialists, became the arbiters of policy decisions.Two years back, the top two removed whatever little restraints remained in the BJP’s constitution on the selection of a new party chief. They called a meeting of the BJP’s national convention and amended the rules to do away with the existing norms in the selection of the party president.As eminent analyst Harish Khare pointed out, it gave the Shah-appointed parliamentary board full powers to “take a decision related to its president, including his or her term and its extension in ’emergency’ situations”.We still don’t know whether the amendments could be interpreted to Include the other party bodies.P. Raman is a veteran journalist.