The new personal Azadi

Which system of government is best - monarchy, dictatorship or democracy? None of these. In particular, the concept that azadi (independence) means getting rid of the foreigner from the government is plain BS. Has removal of British from India been good for the common man? Absolutely not. As I heard several times from my father and grandfather, the common man was far happier under the British than he is now. Is there another benchmark for a good government than  happiness of the common man? Colour of skin, or stamp on passport? Nah!
In this era of enlightened citizenship, RTI and PIL, independence no longer means getting rid of the foreigner. It means getting rid of everyone who wants to get unfettered control over your life. Merely changing a foreigner for a fellow Indian is no solution. Treat no one as your master. Challenge every wrong done to you. Some years back, it was not possible. But now the global and national environment has changed and it is possible. If not, make it possible. That would be the war of independence.
It is in this connection that the recent victory of the young lady (Ms S Singal)  who challenged the legal validity of IT Sec 66A in the Supreme Court and won it, becomes important. She proved that 540 odd parliamentarians of India (since 2008, when this law was enacted), President of India and hundreds of legal eagles/babus of the IT and law ministry had all been pushing an illegal provision. These guys are neither knowledgeable nor well intentioned.
Anyone who treats politics as a full time career just can not be a sensible human being. A sensible guy spends time with family and personal interests, not with his voters. If the guy is more keen to be with you than he is with his wife/husband/children or his guitar/TV/cooking, he obviously has something to gain from this hard work. When I heard of how Narendra Modi was rushing from one political meeting to another before the last elections, I wondered - 'What's wrong with this man? What's his angle?'. Then it struck me that his angle was power and/or money - whether for himself or his party
The days of nationalists like Mahatma Gandhi are over. The motivations of these guys are purely selfish. In any case, Mahatma Gandhi was a very relaxed man, with all the time for his ashram  his wife and his goat.
When I was kid, I read it some where, 'If I hear of someone coming solely to help me, I'll flee immediately.'
No man is good enough to rule over another man.
Question every move of the these kings - PM, CM, DM, SP etc. Whenever their decisions don't suit you, take them to court. Be your own master. Actually, you ARE king. Indian constitution starts with preamble, 'We, the people of India, give to ourselves -----this constitution-', not 'Lord Rama/Krishna/Mr XYZ gives to the people of India -----'. No one gives it to you. It is yours to start with.
We are kings. Since we are busy with our work, we appoint these guys to sit somewhere and legislate on our behalf. For their work , we pay them through our tax money.
Fight for your kingdom alone. Don't make groups and expect others to fight for you. That's what the initial idea of political parties was. The moment another person joins your cause, he'll add his interests to it, diluting yours.
That is AZADI. Very personal. It is nothing to do with forms of government but with declaring your commitment towards your own life. Of course, the price has to be paid.
मुझे चाहिए आज़ादी  - ले के रहूंगा आज़ादी ( I want freedom and I'll do whatever it takes to get it)