From Paul Johnson's book 'Modern Times', One of the princes who funded Ghandi's travels remarked; "It takes a lot of money to keep Ghandi in poverty".

Ghandi read Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau and was inspired by it. His whole life was formed around the ideas he got from Thoreau.

I've never quite sorted out what I think about Ghandi and civil disobedience tactics. All of the literature tells me that I'm supposed to admire what he accomplished and how he did it. Yet, I tend to see it as a leading example of something that is commonplace now: viewing the values of civilized behavior not as a glue that holds society together, but merely as a weakness to be exploited. As I've read elsewhere, India would still be a colony if the British hadn't been so damn civilized.

Further, and to expand on that last point, civil disobedience is of no value in the face of authorities who are willing to use force. It didn't do a damn bit of good in Tiananmen Square in 1989, or in Prague in 1968. India is moving in the direction of Western democracy now, and bully for them, but that trend has a lot less to do with Ghandi and a lot more to do with the end of Soviet patronage. Now that Russia is bound and determined to reclaim all of its colonies (plus some new ones), India is going to have to think less like Ghandi and more like George Washington.

It's interesting to read what Richard Shenkman wrote about Gandhi in his 1993 book "Legends, Lies & Cherished Myths of World History." Unfortunately, I can't find more than one sentence at a time in Google Books, so all I can tell you is that it appears on pages 174-177.

Quote: "People tried to convince him the Nazis weren't like the British, that nonviolence wouldn't work with them, but Gandhi always thought it would..."

More here, from The Harvard Crimson, 1983 (most of it is from Richard Grenier, from Commentary):

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1983/3/7/the-truth-about-gandhi-pbtbhe-movie/

At least four of the main points were also mentioned by Shenkman, ten years later. Including the enema obsession and his awful treatment of his family - but, as Shenkman noted, plenty of great men in history are known for treating their wives and children badly.

(Which is not to say that it's OK for men like Gandhi or Einstein to get married and have kids in the first place. Would it really have been so terrible had either of them never married? Or quietly had a vasectomy when young? Not that Gandhi would ever have approved of such an operation, of course. BTW, for those who don't know, reports indicate that Einstein's second wife wasn't much happier in her marriage than his first wife - no doubt in part because of his multiple affairs.)

His whole life was formed around the ideas he got from Thoreau.

Posted by: Steve In Tulsa at June 13, 2014 5:27 AM
________________________________

Er, from what I heard, he got just as much inspiration from Jainism. (He was not a Jain by birth.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jainism

"Jainism, traditionally known as Jaina dharma, is an Indian religion that prescribes a path of non-violence towards all living beings and emphasizes spiritual independence and equality between all forms of life. Practitioners believe that non-violence and self-control are the means by which they can obtain liberation. Currently, Jainism is divided into two major sects —Digambara and Śvētāmbara."

(There's a lot more.)

"Jainism, traditionally known as Jaina dharma, is an Indian religion that prescribes a path of non-violence towards all living beings

So, how do they eat? Or justify bathing?