Was our freedom movement as free as we think it to be?

Colonists who had the power and efficiency to rule and exploit the
lands thousands of miles away from their homes cannot be supposed not
to possess anything about the exit strategies. With the beginning of
20th century, it was written on the wall that the coming decades of
the century will see the cascading effects of freedom movements. As
great managers they started planning exit strategies. This strategy
was meant to minimize the losses at their end and leaving the least
ill-will. So amidst all the freedom movements that were naturally
evolving, they facilitated the platforms that best suited their
interests in the post-independence scenario. They were ruthless
against the true nationalists who were branded as terrorists. They
were wiped out literally. Thousands were sent to Kala Pani in India in
this context. Now do you understand why Bhagat Singh was allowed to be
hanged? Why was Subhas Chander Bose kicked out of the mainstream
freedom movement even though his confidante was legitimately elected Congress
president? Why more efficient Congressites like Sardar Patel remained
in the shadow of Nehru? Simple fact is that the Britishers were
cleverly facilitating a Western-educated class of leaders who were 75
percent Westerners and would be the safest options during the critical
decades before and after the Independence. It was a well-managed
transfer of power. It was a well-managed first ring of
Western-educated leadership that did not allow the real black, native
nationalist of India to take the hot seat of the freedom movement and
the chair after independence. Just see the decades after independence
and you will realize the great undercurrent of British in particular
(and Western in general) facilitation profitably flowing under the so
called native black river of independence.