Few Questions on Independence Movement

During the Independence movement, many people left their jobs/colleges/schools on the call of Gandhi and Congress. What happened to all of them? How was their life before and after joining the movement?

What happened to the people who were put in jail?

What happened to the families of those who were in jail?

If we had not got the independence, what difference would it have made to those people?

If we had not got the independence, what difference would it have made to the common man (atleast to 99.9% of the Indians)?

If Britishers were robbing our country, what are our leaders doing? (Rs.1,700,000,000,000 in a single year is not at all a small amount.)

Did we get independence, so that, Indians can rob the country instead of Britishers?

If we criticize Britishers for Divide and Rule policy, are not our leaders doing the same in the name of religion, caste, locality, language, dialect and by many others?

Does the Nationality matter (British, Indian, or Italian) or do we need someone who can improve our Life?

Why no history book (atleast what is available to 99% of the people) talk about the elections that happened before Independence except as one line in 500 pages book?

Why no history book talks about the Britishers giving the maximum control (in writing and spirit) to the elected governments (who are Indians) in the states many years before the Independence?

How many incidents were there when Britishers violated the constitution that they had written for ruling India?

Was the constitution that they had written for India, too bad for Indians?

How many times, Indians were arrested/killed, by violating their constitution (barring Jallianwala Bagh and couple of other similar incidents)?

Was the only motive of Independence, ruling by Indians and nothing else?

If not that many people sacrificed their life, when would we have got the Independence?

Do our freedom fighters know that, Ruling cannot be and should not be changed overnight? (One great leader asked for the freedom that night itself, if possible)

Indian Leaders rejected Simon Commission because, it does not have any Indians in it. Is it justifiable? Clement Attlee, who was a member of Simon Commission then, subsequently became the Prime Minister and gave Independence to India. Have not we blocked Clement Attlee to some extent in giving Independence to India?

There were 500 Kingdoms in India till 1947. What was the stand of the freedom fighters on those kingdoms? Just because, they were paying royalty to British, did they think that, they would be automatically merged in the country after Independence?

If we see the present andhra pradesh area, people in Hyderabad state suffered more because of Nizam's rule than the coastal andhra people by Britishers. Didn't our freedom fighters know that?

Unrelated Note:

In Chennai, I overheard a conversation of a young telugu couple. The person was telling his wife that, at the time of the separation of the state, NTR asked for Tirupathi, and MGR asked for Chennai. That's why, Chennai went to Tamilnadu, and Andhra got Tirupathi.

That was one of the funniest conversations that I heard. Probably, I can convince him that he was not correct. But, after 15-20 years, convincing his child would be more difficult, because, if anyone is believing something for more than 15 years, it requires lot of effort to change their belief.

I feel, Given enough power, history can be changed. (Atleast to what is known to 99.99% of the people.)