After N-E, it's Karnataka's turn now to finish off Congress: PM Narendra Modi

Shivaji is a great icon in Maharashtra. Different sections of society have given him very high status, though for diverse reasons. Folklores about him abound in the state. His statues, popular songs on him are very prevalent. These folk songs (Powadas) praise his multifarious actions. So it was no surprise that when Jayabhagwan Goyal, released his book, ‘Aaj ka Shivaji: Narendra Modi’, at religious-cultural meet organized by Delhi BJP, there was a strong resentment in Maharashtra. Various leaders from Maharashtra were furious. The Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut challenged the Shivaji’s descendent, Sambhaji Raje who is in BJP and is member of Rajya Sabha, to resign on the issue. Sambhaji Raje in turn stated that "We respect Narendra Modi, who was elected as the prime minister of the country for the second time. But neither (Narendra) Modi nor anybody else in the world can be compared with Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj,"

Not to be left behind Jitendra Awhad of NCP felt Modi-BJP are insulting the pride of Maharashtra. It is not the first time that controversy is erupting around the Maharashtra warrior of medieval period. Earlier we had seen Sambhaji Brigrade demanding the ban on James Laine book, Shivaji: ‘A Hindu King in an Islamic Kingdom’, for its objectionable content. Bhandarkar Institute in Pune, which had helped James Laine in his research, was also vandalized. At another level there was a talk that Babasaheb Purandare, a Brahmin, who has written some popular material on Shivaji will be made as the Chairman of the committee for statue of Shivaji. Maratha Mahasangh and Shiv Dharm officials objected to a Brahmin heading the committee for a statue for the Maratha warrior. The caste angel in Shivaji’s case is coming to the fore from quite some time.

While there is no dearth of controversies around Shivaji, it is also true that each political tendency has created Shivaji’s image from their political point of view. Who was the real Shivaji, is the question. One can see two clear streams of projection in this matter. On one hand there is an attempt to present Shivaji as the anti Muslim King, a king who was respecting Cows and Brahmins (Go Brahman pratipalak). This view was brought forward from the times of Lokmanya Tilak and picked up by Hindu nationalists, who have been looking for icons in history to suit their political agenda. Nathram Godse, while criticizing Gandhi says that Gandhi’s nationalism was dwarf in front of the one of Shivaji or Rana Pratap.

In tune with this the Hindu nationalists are promoting both these as icons of Hindu nationalism and giving anti-Muslim slant to the whole discourse. This discourse also hides in this the Brahmanical agenda of Hindu nationalism as Cows and Brahmins are presented as the central object of veneration by Shivaji. This image of Shivaji fits well into the current agenda of Hindu nationalists, being spearheaded by RSS Combine.

It is because of this that for seeking votes in Mumbai Narendra Modi on the eve of 2014 elections stated that Shivaji attacked Surat to plunder the treasury of Aurangzeb. This also presents Shivaji-Aurangzeb, Shivaji-Afzal Khan interactions as battle between Hindus and Muslims. The truth is that Surat was plundered for its wealth as it was a rich port city and Bal Samant’s book on the topic gives in depth description of the same. It is noteworthy that Shivaji began his real career of conquest in 1656 when he conquered Javli from the Maratha Chief Chandra Rao More. He took over the treasures of this kingdom. That it was not a Hindu Muslim battle becomes clear when we know that in confrontation with Aurangzeb it was Mirza Raja Jaisingh who was negotiating and engaging with Shivaji on behalf of Aurangzeb. And Shivaji had Muslim officers like Kazi Haider as confidential secretary and many Muslim Generals in his army.

Darya Sarang was chief of armor division, Daulat Khan was in-charge of his naval division; Ibrahim Khan was another general of significance in his army.  This mixed up administration just shows that the kings were not having Hindu or Muslim administration depending on their religion. In the confrontation between Shivaji and Afzal Khan, Rustam-e-Jaman was Shivaji’s side and Afzal Khan had Krisnaji Bhaskar Kulkarni on his side.

As far as Shivaji’s popularity is concerned it was due to his being a King with welfare of his subjects in his mind. He lightened the burden of taxation on the average peasants, and reduced the domination of landlords over the serfs. This picture of Shivaji is well documents in the booklets by Com. Govind Pansare (Who was Shivaji) and Jayant Gadkari (Shivaji: Ek Lok Kalyankari Raja- Shivaji: King doing People’s Welfare). He did not belong to the warrior caste so Brahmins had refused to coronate him, for which purpose Gaga Bhatt a Brahmin from Kashi was brought in with heavy fees. Teesta Setalvad’s hand book on History for teachers underlined this fact.

Today while BJP-Brahmanical forces want to present Shivaji as worshipper of Brahmins and cows, the non upper caste have seen through the game. As such it was Jotirao Phule who brought forward the caste angel of Shivaji as he wrote Powada (Poem) in his honor and today dalit Bahujan are not toeing Hindu Nationalist projection on the issue.

The likes of Jayabhagwan Goyal of BJP as such are trying to give two messages through such attempts. One hand they want to paint Shivaji in anti Muslim and Brahmanical color, they also want to give the subtle message of similarity of this presentation of Shivaji with what Modi is doing. Non BJP forces have seen this game and want to present the other picture of Shivaji, which was highlighted by the likes of Jotirao Phule and which today many of those standing for rights of dalit-Bahujan are trying to articulate. The criticism of the said, book, since withdrawn is on these twin aspects. One about the picture of Shivaji who was concerned about welfare of the farmers, and two his respect for people of all religions.

Bengaluru, Feb 4: The possibility of defeated MLA CP Yogeshwar being inducted into chief minister BS Yediyurappa’s cabinet is causing ripples within the ruling BJP, with many legislators, especially from Kalyana-Karnataka region, raising a banner of revolt.

Several MLAs led by Surapur legislator Narasimha Nayak, also known as Raju Gouda, held a meeting at the Legislators Home on Monday and voiced their opposition.

"When there are more than two dozen MLAs aspiring for a cabinet berth, making a former MLA a minister is beyond logic," Gouda said. "We will convey our feelings to Yediyurappa and state BJP president Nalin Kumar Kateel." Murugesh Nirani, Paranna Munavalli, Rajkumar Patil, Dattatreya Patil Revoor, Basavaraj Mattimud are among others who attended the meeting. MP Renukacharya, political secretary to the CM and Honnali MLA, was also present at the meeting. "Some more MLAs will join us when we meet again tomorrow," Gouda said.

The MLAs highlighted the issue of caste and regional imbalance in the council of ministers to further their cause. With four from Bengaluru and three from Belagavi district set to take oath on February 6, the share of MLAs from these districts in the cabinet will rise to seven and five respectively. Currently, 16 districts have no representation.

Sources say Yediyurappa and BJP’s national leadership decided to reward Yogeshwar with a cabinet berth for his "active" role in getting 17 Congress-JD(S) MLAs to resign and join the BJP, enabling the party to grab power. The party also believes he has the potential to become the Vokkaliga face of the BJP in the Old Mysuru region, where the party’s organisation is weak.

If Yogeshwar is inducted, he will be the second former MLA to make it to Yediyurappa cabinet after deputy CM Laxman Savadi, who lost the 2018 assembly polls. Several party MLAs were unhappy with Savadi’s elevation and are now upping the ante against the party leadership.

"Let Yogeshwar be made Rajya Sabha or council member. We have no problem. But making him minister is not acceptable. If they want to make defeated MLAs ministers, then why not AH Vishwanath and MTB Nagaraj, whose sacrifices brought BJP to power?" said Gouda.

Reports say Yediyurappa has promised Vishwanath and Nagaraj, the disqualified MLAs who lost the bypolls, that they would be made ministers in June. Both met Yediyurappa and secured this assurance. The two were demanding that they be inducted into the cabinet on Thursday.

Meanwhile, Vijayapura MLA Basavanagouda Patil Yatnal urged the CM to evaluate the performance of existing ministers and drop those found non-performing. "Many ministers don’t even come to the Vidhana Soudha. What is the use of having such ministers?" he asked.

Yediyurappa also continued to face pressure to induct Athani MLA Mahesh Kumatalli into the cabinet. The Jarkiholi brothers, Ramesh and Balachandra met Yediyurappa separately on Monday with a request to make Kumatalli, their confidant, a minister.

Mangaluru, Apr 16: An old refrigerator has been turned into a "disinfection chamber" by researchers who are striving to come up with solutions to tackle the spread of coronavirus.

Dr Arun M Isloor, head of Chemistry Department, National Institute of Technology Karnataka (NITK), Surathkal, along with research scholar Syed Ibrahim has come up with the device which can disinfect items kept inside it.

"We have named this as ZERO-COV," Dr Isloor said.

He says the device ensures 99.9 per cent destruction of microorganisms present on the surface of items.

"We can keep items like vegetables, currency notes, books or envelopes inside the chamber. Switching on the chamber for 15 minutes ensures 99.9 per cent destruction of microorganisms present in the surface of the items," Dr Isloor added.