What are your thoughts on the British Government providing Mahatma Gandhi a “maintenance allowance” during his imprisonment, especially when Gandhi supporters often troll Savarkar over receiving a British “pension”?
I recently came across British Government records from the colonial period concerning Gandhi’s detention.
One document from 1930 refers to a monthly allowance sanctioned for Gandhi’s “maintenance” while he was detained as a State Prisoner at Yeravada Central Prison.
Another government document from the 1940s records “allowances to Mr. Gandhi and persons detained with him” during his detention at Aga Khan Palace.
To be clear, I am not claiming that Gandhi was receiving a salary or pension from the British. These documents appear to concern maintenance expenses/allowances during detention.
But this raises an interesting question about the terminology and the double standards in political discourse.
Savarkar is frequently mocked or labelled a “British pensioner” because he received a monthly allowance from the colonial government during his period of internment.
So should similar terminology be applied to Gandhi, or is there an important distinction between the two cases?
I’m genuinely interested in hearing what people think. Please focus on the historical records and context rather than turning this into a Gandhi vs Savarkar shouting match.