Truth is immutable. Fictional script can be altered at will. An economic boom can be transformed into an economic nightmare overnight. The prime minister, who painted rosy pictures in election campaigns, all of a sudden screamed exceptional crisis. A sinister delimitation bill is packaged in the lofty ideal of women’s empowerment. A trade deal insidious to Indian interest is portrayed as a boom for the nation. Consequences of flawed economic and foreign policies are presented as an unavoidable impact of war. A sinister sectarian agenda is couched in a noble narrative of sabka-saath-sabka-vikas – ‘with all, progress for all’. It will not be fallacious to presume that Narendra Modi is fictionalising Indian democracy.The plot turns on situational logic, with the power of propaganda constructing a convincing pivot for the convenience of hawking the fiction.While the desperation to control the narrative is the primary force behind this deceptive ploy, Modi also exploits this trick for refurbishing his own fading image. He chairs a routine meeting of the Council of Ministers and twists the messaging to link it to the larger goal of Viksit Bharat.In this image posted on May 22, 2026, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, Road Transport and Highways Minister Nitin Gadkari, Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan, National Security Advisor (NSA) Ajit Doval and others during the meeting of the council of ministers, in New Delhi. Photo: @narendramodi/X via PTI.His post on X gives some insight into how he conducted the meeting. The photograph he shared with the public separates him from the rest of the ministerial crowd and elevates him to a position distinct from the other members of the cabinet. It serves as a reminder that he does not hold the position of “first among equals,” a term used to describe the role of a prime minister in a parliamentary democracy. He also asks his colleagues to search for sources of alternative energy. Does the optics not undermine the constitutional arrangement of collective responsibility? Do they not transform the cabinet into merely a group of advisers? Is this not a declaration that he alone makes decisions? Institutions continue to exist but without their constitutionally assigned roles.The much-hyped “Melodi” drama in Rome also presents another dimension of the fictionalisation of democracy, where common diplomatic gestures are made to appear as unique events intended not only to redeem his image but to divert attention from the true purpose of his visit. The gesture was loud and frivolous. The drama indeed brought a brief pause to the austerity shows in which ministers were travelling by bus and the chief minister was flying economy class.The manner in which austerity measures were announced also points towards fictionalisation of the real discourse. Amidst striking extravagance as manifested in his craze for self-publicity and ostentatious foreign trips, a purely economic necessity was given a touch of patriotism. Buying costlier petrol, eating less oil and avoiding gold purchase become a response to call of nationalism. That’s fiction bearing down facts. His appeal must have touched the core of the Indian ethos, aparigraha or non-possessiveness. The opposition’s demand for answers was bound to go in vain. Democracy gets hurt, but without any noise.The first step towards the fictionalisation of democracy was the mystification of the Israel-US war on Iran. The prime minister likens the crisis to the COVID pandemic, and the war takes on the character of a natural calamity. The mystification effectively absolves Modi of charges of pursuing a flawed foreign policy, for no human being can be held responsible for a natural calamity. The narrative presents him as an innocent bystander who is ignorant of developments in West Asia and visits Israel without any awareness of escalating tensions. It renders irrelevant debates over Modi succumbing to US pressure and stopping the purchase of oil from Iran and Russia. The mystification also prevents questions from being raised about Modi’s recent visit to the pro-Israel UAE when foreign ministers from BRICS countries were in Delhi to discuss the crisis. In an opaque democracy with little or almost no access to information on security, finance, or deteriorating living conditions, there is no avenue for people to know about the manipulations occurring behind the scenes. This makes the task easier for the rulers. However, in this case, some pointed to the corporate connections behind Modi’s foreign policy. Speculation appeared suggesting that his tours of the Nordic countries and Italy might have been aligned with the interests of a major Indian corporate group.We also find elements of fiction in Modi’s choice of a public rally to announce austerity measures. He does this to make his communication with the public appear informal. The tactic forms an essential part of his governance. His Mann ki Baat is the best example of informal yet unilateral communication. In announcing austerity measures, he discards all available channels, including Parliament, state-run television channels, and even party platforms, in order to make the communication appear even more informal than before. He does not discuss the matter in the cabinet either. At a time when institutions are divorced from their constitutional roles, even the small gesture of consulting others might instil some confidence in democratic institutions. However, he deliberately chooses to eliminate such a possibility. He repeats the tactic in The Hague for the same purpose and announces the possible rise in poverty at a community gathering of immigrant Indians. How can the prime minister of a democracy reveal such vital information to an informal gathering outside the country?Also read: Modi Govt’s Tightly Controlled Script Comes Under Dutch Journalistic ScrutinyPeople may wonder why Modi fictionalises democracy at a time when he is in full command of every major institution and has achieved an unexpected victory in West Bengal. The conquest of West Bengal has demonstrated that little can prevent him from winning elections. The victory has decisively altered the nature of elections by introducing new elements into the electoral system – the SIR, a category of “logical discrepancies”, tribunals to scrutinise voters’ eligibility, a large deployment of central forces, counting personnel from the Union government, and so on. However, absolute control hardly guarantees immunity from instability. The narrative of ghuspaithiyas (infiltrators) cannot legitimise control over West Bengal. Discontent arising from disenfranchisement and the suppression of minorities and the opposition may lead to destabilisation. Modi may therefore be looking towards the fictionalisation of democracy as a diversionary tool.However, the project of fictionalisation primarily depends on communal narratives, the time-tested tool of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and the BJP. Analysts failed to pay attention to a recent event at Somnath. Within a week of the conquest of West Bengal, Modi organised an Amrut Mahotsava (75th anniversary) to commemorate the inauguration of the new temple at Somnath. One rarely hears of celebrations marking the inauguration day of a place of worship. Moreover, neither the RSS nor the BJP was associated with the construction of the new temple at Somnath. Sardar Patel conceived the idea, while Congress leaders K. M. Munshi and N. V. Gadgil executed it. Rajendra Prasad, another Congress stalwart, inaugurated it. Prime Minister Nehru wanted the Indian state to maintain distance from the affair, and Prasad did the same by inaugurating the temple in his private capacity. He had reiterated his government’s commitment to the ideals of secularism.“It is very necessary that each one of us should realise that the best course is to act with a sense of respect and equality towards every community and creed. In it lies the welfare of our nation and country and of every one of us. This faith and conviction has impelled India to adopt the policy of secularism and to give an assurance that there shall be no discrimination on grounds of religion. Everyone would be provided equal opportunities,” he had said.While Prasad’s speech contains no communal references, Modi’s speech is replete with divisive statements. His theme goes beyond promoting a communal narrative. He makes the Amrut Mahotsava part of the Somnath Swabhiman Parva, a programme initiated on January 11, 2026 to commemorate the first attack by Mahmud of Ghazni a thousand years ago. The prime minister links the celebration to the second nuclear test conducted during the Vajpayee government on May 11, 1998. That is how democracy becomes fictionalised. How can the Pokhran test be linked to the attack of Mahmud of Ghazni? Moreover, Vajpayee led the Pokhran-II tests, while Prime Minister Indira Gandhi led the Pokhran-I tests on May 18, 1974. Rewriting history, you see, is one of the core aspects of the fictionalisation of Indian democracy.Anil Sinha is a senior journalist.