What exactly is the direction that Narendra Modi’s economic policies are taking? A low murmur of concern is doing the rounds amongst his supporters, as they view his more recent moves with some trepidation.

Demonetisation, a move cast in the mould of Indira Gandhi’s early actions, followed by a budget that gives tax breaks to the poorer, while levying a surcharge on the relatively better off, sends a signal that the reformist zeal of the government is well under control for now.

As Sadanand Dhume puts it in Wall Street Journal, “it’s time to accept that whatever else Mr Modi uses his 2014 mandate for, it will not be to dramatically reform Asia’s third-largest economy”. Could it be that being in power at the Centre for only two and a half years has changed Modi’s views?

One explanation is that Narendra Modi is less a reformist and more a pragmatist. But that explanation does not sit well with his move to demonetize 86% of the currency in India. It was a high-risk sweeping action that sought to bring about a transformational change.

Modi called it a ‘historic cleansing ritual’, a ‘shuddhi yagna’ and that description reveals a lot. A striking pattern in his efforts, from Swachh Bharat to demonetization, is the recurring reference to the need to purify of the dirt that engulfs this country.

The idea that the nation is mired in filth of different kinds, and needs a spiritually evolved leader to act decisively to clean it up, is one that animates a lot of Modi’s actions. It is possible then that Modi’s recent shift away from conventional reformist policies is rooted in a deeper place.

Perhaps it is time to consider a more radical possibility, which gets laid out in the paragraphs that follow.

Here is the hypothesis. Narendra Modi was never a great believer in free enterprise. He finds business useful, but does not trust it. The ease with which he can contemplate actions that can hurt business, big and small is a pointer to how he feels.

For instance, the impact of demonetization on the informal economy, which incidentally included the BJP’s traditional base, did not seem to weigh too heavily on Modi’s mind. His larger project is that of cleansing India of various impurities, and in that endeavor, business is more often than not part of the problem rather than the solution.

In fact, in line with his disdain for all things ‘unclean’, he quite possibly thinks of business as a somewhat distasteful, contaminating activity and regards the way business is carried out with thinly veiled contempt.

He is disgusted by the obvious show of self-interest and the transparent attempts made by its leaders to cozy up to whoever is in power and repelled by how easily the most allegedly powerful people can be brought to heel, a spectacle that he possibly enjoys with perverse pleasure.

And how does this somewhat extreme hypothesis account for the Modi charm offensive in Gujarat? What about the Gujarat model and its famed efficiency in clearing projects and rolling out the red carpet for industry? And is the opposition wrong too, about his running a suit-boot ki sarkar, and about his connections with the Adanis of the world?

There is no question that Narendra Modi has used industry well particularly in his stint at CM of Gujarat. But it was above all, a user’s relationship. It must be remembered that with industry, he has always operated from a position of strength, rather than that of need.

The implicit deal with industry was that they would shower him with tributes, and he, in turn, would give them a playing arena shorn of the usual obstacles encountered in India. If in other states, getting clearances involved greasing the palms of the power apparatus, in Gujarat it was much simpler- there was grease that required, but in was non-monetary in nature and needed to be directed only in the direction of one man.

Mr Modi has always seen himself as standing apart from everyone else- he does not acknowledge anyone else as a peer, and therefore, the terms that he sets in any relationship are very clear- one is either a follower/ supplicant or one is an enemy.

For industry, the role of being a supplicant is an absurdly easy one to don. The state in India has trained it well in this regard; what was different in Modi’s case was that he honoured the terms of their agreement exceptionally well, and thus for once, the honeyed words that industry routinely doled out for everyone in power had the rare ring of sincerity in them.

An important part of Modi’s leadership construct is his detachment from (and contempt for) the other sources of power and wealth that other lesser mortals than him, hunger for. Keeping the wealthy in their place is a significant part of the Modi persona. Nobody is allowed to get secure, or believe that his or her relationship with the man will count for something in a moment of crisis.

That is not to suggest that business will not or cannot prosper under Modi, but merely that there is no inherent and overriding belief in business itself. Growth and development are desirable, a high score on the ease of doing business is a goal worth chasing because it attracts investment; but these are all means to an end.

Unlike Donald Trump, with whom Modi is often compared, who has the instincts of a take-no-prisoners hardnosed businessman, Modi shows the instincts of a pracharak, who regards the ‘tainted’ world around him as a project, and feels compelled to offer himself as the cleansing agent who carries the burden of transformational change.

Unlike Trump, one cannot imagine key business figures being offered positions of significance in the Modi administration. Economic reform is not a central part of his worldview, and those that expect that of his government do so at their peril.