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.