Effectively. Like all national politicians, he had the same resources at his disposal that a rich person in his country would have. His ascetic life was voluntarily so.
Social capital is dependent upon the continuing goodwill of others. That is an important restriction. If Gandhi had dropped his ascetic lifestyle, deciding to obtain a mansion, his social capital would have declined dramatically.
Yes, but he'd still have had the mansion and the lifestyle. He'd have just lost the adoring crowds.
People with mansions always have an adoring crowd.
Saddam had a lot of mansions.
He had an adoring crowd too. He just had a much larger opposite crowd.