When Should India’s Independence Day Really Be?

Prime Minister of India Jawaharlal Nehru raised the Indian flag above the Red Fort in Delhi on August 15, 1947. After 200 years of British rule, India celebrated its freedom with the passage of the Indian Independence Act. Decades of nonviolent protests led by distinguished freedom fighters like Mahatma Gandhi had finally culminated in liberation, and in the years that followed, India hoisted flags, held parades, and partook in lavish ceremonies to commemorate that fateful day.

However, many Indians would soon realize that true independence takes time. India had achieved apparent independence—it had the right to elect its own leaders—but true independence includes economic and cultural independence as well.

For decades after the first Independence Day, British influence remained strong and present in India. Forty-eight years after declaring independence, the city of Bombay was renamed Mumbai. Six years after that, Calcutta changed its name to Kolkata. The names of several major Indian cities did not reflect the way that Indians pronounced them until decades after they were free of British rule. Changing the names of two major cities was a major undertaking, underscoring how important the break away from Britain was. However, the fact that it happened more than half a century after independence shows how long that connection to Britain lasted.

Though India had a self-reliant economy before British rule, India’s economy was dependent on external help long after independence. British rule had caused a long period of economic stagnation, with India’s per capita income declining by eight percent. As a result, they were not able to provide resources for lower income citizens, and foreign aid was required to prevent devastating famines.

India’s political, economic, and cultural state of affairs was entangled with that of Britain for a long time, and in many ways, it still is. The majority of Indian schooling, especially in higher education, is in English. This structure is partially due to the English Education Act of 1835, which was based on the treatise “Minute on Education” by Thomas Babington Macaulay. The English Education Act required the Indian education system to teach more classes in English and incorporate English textbooks into the curriculum. Today, nearly 400 million Indians speak English, and India’s courts largely use English even after independence from Britain.

The continued use of English in Indian schools and professions has its roots in the British empire. Learning English was crucial to reaching success under the British. It gave Indians some humanity in the eyes of the British and helped them get better jobs. Even after the British left, a large number of Indians clung to the idea that keeping elements of British culture would help them prosper, and as a result, Indian languages and culture often got pushed aside.

Residual British influence is undeniably present. The question, however, is whether it is overall positive or negative. British rule was devastating for India, as it destroyed the economy and deepened religious divisions. The British facilitated Partition, the hastily conceived division of India, leaving a million innocent people dead and displacing millions more. The British promoted antagonism between Muslims, Hindus, and other religious groups, which has resulted in a large amount of violence. They encouraged the Hindu caste system, creating unnecessary divides. But the British left positive contributions as well: infrastructure, such as the education system and railway system, was improved during British rule. Though Britain only intended to increase its own profits, this infrastructure would be further developed after Independence and modified to serve the rest of India.

British influence may never truly leave India. Globalization has connected the world in irreversible ways, such that external influences reach every corner of the world. People migrating to different parts of the globe bring many aspects of their cultures with them. This phenomenon can be positive. After all, the fusion of cultures only becomes detrimental when one culture starts overpowering the other. Unfortunately, this relationship is often the case in India, where British culture was violently forced upon native Indians.

No one really knows when India was truly free of British control. Independence is more complex than it looks, and the lines will always be blurry. That said, the progress made since 1947 is remarkable. Britain and India are now on more equal footing, and India’s economy has improved significantly. It’s impossible to say when exactly India became independent, or if it has ever truly become independent, but it grows stronger every day.