Nothing is obvious from history!

People in their everyday lives (especially the ones with as much common sense as you and me) are seldom spurred to "change".

We can all very easily relate to principles of distant lands and distant times. In fact, anything that does not affect us currently and whose outcomes we already know enough, is easy to take a stand on, and judge. At some point of time in our lives, each of us in our own ways, must have realized that post-mortem is one of the easiest things to do, to any situation, and judgment is easiest to pass on hindsight.

But, during the times in which they are alive and practised, principles are the toughest things to come to terms with - they almost always sound like ideals too a idealistic and inconvenient to follow. And anyone who believes in something firmly enough to cause inconveniences to himself is simply cast away as a fool, or in gentler terms, someone with a 'not so practical outlook' of life.

Looking back at history, it seems now that our fight for Swaraj was felt deeply by every Indian. It seems that every self respecting individual of that time would have felt the need for it. But, was it that simple to know what side to take, and how much to do for it, at that time? Weren't they all people just like us, allayed by doubts and fears and hopes and insecurities like anyone of us?

The Indian freedom struggle was not one single heroic act of the masses.

Not everyone had the clarity of thought Gandhi had. A leader might be a visionary, but in a movement of the magnitude of the congress, is it possible to pass on the vision and the original inspiration and rationale to every member?

Even with Gandhi in the 1900s, people were confused. There were many factions with multiple goals and sub-goals, some inspired by a need for social/economic change, and some others by religious/spiritual. A number of processions were by children that felt egged on to some vague concept of pride and heroism, with borrowed ideals. A lot of them had more emotional appeal than any solid rationale supporting their actions. For e.g., during the world war 2, many people were not averse to supporting Hitler and germany, just for the reason that Germany was the enemy's enemy. And a number of Militant movements in India were actually comfortable with Hitler's "nationalistic" ideas for Germany.

There were a number of common people like you and me, reasonably educated, that could neither completely agree with the struggle at an emotional level (since they were either not too young for such idealism or not personally affected to feel so strongly about things), nor completely disregard it as a foolhardy act of heroism. Some of them saw the whole process of British Raj as development. India had never been ruled as one country and one people until then. What defined borders that made people Indian, at that time? For e.g., people were as alien to Hindi as they were to English in the southern parts of the country. We DID have a lot of problems. It's not like we were enjoying democracy for many years to condemn British rule as imperialistic.

And for the older generation of Indians, the congress and the nationalist movement, in many ways, despoiled local culture just like the British did. When done by the British, it was seen as defiling everything Indian and traditional. But by the congress, the same thing was viewed as nationalism.

So each man's convictions could have been largely based on his own few personal experiences. Some people thought the British could deliver them. They were not sure India was capable of self-governance and thought that the benefits of British rule outweighed the disadvantages. There were some others that thought deliverance would come through Gandhi and the congress, some others thought Bose etc. (And of course there were some others who just didn't care either-ways!!)

There was good and bad on both sides. And it is only in the annals of history that everything becomes obvious, and one side good and the other bad. But it's never the case when things are actually happening! Everything is hazy, never ones and zeros in life.

It seems very appealing and fashionable now to be wearing western clothes and be fluent in english and read american novels, be able to eat cereal, shop in supermarkets etc etc. It seems like development and liberalism. Why then, was a person 100 years back, well versed in sanskrit, but at the same time could play tennis and had english table manners seen as a pervert who did not uphold Hindustan values?

Right now, if we see movies and read about the sacrifice of millions of people and their leaders, our blood boils at these "British atrocities" perpetrated on our people.

I am not understating the historical facts about the British rule or how much we "suffered" and the heroism of non violence/freedom etc etc.

No doubt they happened. But maybe this is only one side of the picture? A history that is written by us, with an object to glorify us as a people, even if it means showing only one side of the coin? I am trying to look at that big picture with a magnifying glass that looks at the country's sentiments at a more personal, individual level and am wondering what it means.

And I am not sure things would have been easy at those times - choosing sides, especially for a class of people (like our middle class now) that is always insulated from what the "government" does. What did yours or my grand parents do?

Today, we feel righteous about our independence, and are proud of being the largest democracy in the world. But had i lived 75 years ago, i am not sure if i would have taken part in the freedom struggle. I am not sure if i would have not found it romantic to read english novels and hum english tunes. I am not sure if i would not have enjoyed playing tennis and taking to an altogether new culture. In fact, i might have found it quite exciting.

For all we know, we are probably the individuals that are living at a pre-civil war time. A war that will change india completely, root out corruption, change the nature of our international dealings, bring back all the brain that has been drained and establish india as a super power. And when, people 50 yrs into the future read about this in history, they would be imagining that we all are heroes and heroines of that brilliant struggle.

But knowing our government is corrupt at various levels, about farmer suicides, about pollution and the million other problems that are plaguing us, how many of us take them seriously enough to do anything? How many of us even spare one moment off our busy lives for serious affirmative action about this?

Principles and values are often not dramatic decisions. It's mostly the little things we do, the petty, seemingly inconsequential choices we make that finally matter. And how many of us think about them enough to change them?

Are we traitors then, by virtue of our indifference or unwillingness to look at anything outside our "food-shelter-comfort" zone? Have we always been?