4 arrested for killing RSS worker

Bengaluru, Feb 13: 'Karnataka Bandh' call given by various Kannada organisation demanding implementation of Sarojini Mahashi report for ensuring job reservation to local people (Kannadigas) in the Private and government organisation, including industries, evoked mixed response in the State on Thursday.

The Bandh call was given by the “Karnataka Sanghatanegala Okkoota”, comprising a few factions of “Karnataka Rakshana Vedike” (KRV) and was backed by Ola-Uber Cab Drivers’ Association, a few auto unions, farmers’ associations, street vendors association, trade unions and transporters’ associations.

Meanwhile, Airport Taxi Services also supported the Bandh which forced flight passengers to find it difficult in finding the transport for reaching their destination in time. Fortunately, BMTC bus services at Kempegowda International Airport (KIA) was available at the Airport.

Mangaluru, July 24: Karnataka's Dakshina Kannada district reported 8 new Covid-19 deaths in the last two days taking the toll to over 100. The district has recorded 107 Covid-19 deaths till now.

Deputy Commissioner Sindhu B Rupesh on Friday said a 44-year-old man from Mangaluru with the symptoms of respiratory failure, ARDS, AKI MODS hypertension, was admitted to a private hospital on July 19 and died on July 22. His throat swab tested positive for Covid-19 on Friday.

Another 56-year-old man from Mangaluru, who died on July 23, was suffering from urinary tract infection, MODS-septic shock, type II diabetes mellitus, hypothyroidism, systematic hypertension and IHD and had tested positive for Covid-19.

Mangaluru saw two more deaths -- a 75-year-old woman suffering from COPD with type 2 respiratory failure and multi-organ dysfunction syndrome with septic shock and a 65-year-old woman, who was suffering from BP and diabetes and admitted to a private hospital on July 13 and died on July 23.

A 61-year-old woman from Puttur, who was suffering from diabetes mellitus and hypertension and was undergoing treatment at a private hospital, died on July 23.

A 67-year-old man from Bhadravathi in Shivamogga, who was admitted to Wenlock Hospital on July 13 and was suffering from pneumonia and respiratory infection, died on July 23. He too tested positive for Covid-19.

Some of the other deaths were those of -- a 42-year-old man from Bantwal suffering from type 1 respiratory failure, urosepsis and uncontrolled type 2 diabetes and a 67-year-old man from Bhadravathi suffering from acute myocardial infarction, uncontrolled type 2 diabetes and systematic hypertension, Both died at private hospitals on July 23.

180 fresh cases

The Covid-19 graph slightly moved downward with the recording of 180 fresh cases, including four police personnel from Puttur police station. Of the positive cases, 56 are the primary contacts of the infected persons, 68 are suffering from Influenza-Like Illness (ILI) and 10 with the symptoms of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SARI).

The contacts of 45 persons who tested positive are being traced. One person with international travel history has also tested positive.

A total of 125 persons recovered and were discharged from hospitals, thus taking the tally of the total discharges to 1987.

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.