Few Indians would credit the prime minister with a rousing sense of humour. His urging the media to start a debate on the values, recruitment, funding and leadership of political parties must count, though, as one of his more mirthful remarks – mirthful because they come from a leader famous for his autocratic ways and on behalf of a party operating in the shadow of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).

Every political party should be more open and democratic, no question. In fact, no major Indian party, at least since the Congress under Jawaharlal Nehru, has been terribly transparent and pluralistic. Even Nehru fought the temptation to boss his party around.

Modi is of course not-so-subtly pointing a finger at the current Congress Party under the Gandhis and asking the media to question its attachment to dynastic rule. To think he is carrying a torch for inner party democracy is unconvincing, to say the least.

Modi’s remarks about party democracy contrast to his record. As chief minister of Gujarat and Prime Minister of India he is widely reported to have governed with little heed to the cabinet, legislature or media. Given the mediocrity of his cabinet, ignoring its members is perhaps forgivable, even commendable. Bypassing elected senior leaders and operating largely through senior officials is not, however, terribly democratic.

As for engaging Parliament, Modi is no worse but no better than any previous prime minister. Nehru apart, no Indian prime minister has deigned to debate. At best, our PMs make an occasional long-winded or combative speech and then subside.

Question Hour, in Westminster, features the British prime minister jumping to his or her feet to answer queries from MPs. Modi has stuck with the solid Indian tradition of magisterially crossing one’s arms and staring into space.

Modi never addresses a press conference and seldom gives an interview: here too, he is no worse than his predecessors except Nehru. Modi claims he doesn’t have time to interact with the media because governing India sits heavy on his shoulders. What he doesn’t seem to understand (or care about) is that dealing with the media, in a democracy, is good governance.

Finally, the prime minister’s sterling call to action on behalf of party democracy is amusing because he belongs to a party that relies heavily on the RSS, that other “parivar” in India. Unlike the Gandhis, this parivar is not elected. Quite where its authority comes from is a mystery.

However, can anyone doubt that its views are decisive within BJP? Perhaps no senior appointment in the cabinet and no major policy can proceed without the tacit or explicit approval of RSS elders. And when they turn against BJP personnel or policies, the democratically elected Modi is forced to take corrective action – as he is now for the economy.

Indian democracy is in great peril. The foremost problem is not inner party democracy. The great danger is crass and cynical pseudo-nationalism, brutish majoritarianism, religious extremism, upper caste domination, rampant sexism, inequality and unemployment, sycophancy and fear, and the threat and use of social violence.

Virtually every major leader in the opposition is under investigation for corruption, as if there is no corruption in the ruling party. Several media houses live in worry that lunatic right-wing groups might attack them or that the government will investigate them. Intellectuals, artists and activists are under watch. Vigilantes threaten and kill with impunity. There is law, but it is rule by law rather rule of law.

These are the real challenges of democracy in India.