Karnataka Deputy CM shares video of Dubai Kannadigaru president thanking govt

Bengaluru, Jun 19: COVID-19 cases in Karnataka has breached the 8,000 mark, as the state on Friday reported 337 new cases and ten related fatalities, taking the total number of infections to 8,281 and death toll to 124.

Also, total discharges in the state breached 5,000 mark, with 230 patients getting discharged in a day after recovery.

As of June 19 evening, cumulatively 8,281 COVID-19 positive cases have been confirmed in the state, which includes 124 deaths and 5,210 discharges, the health department said in its bulletin.

It said out of 2,943 active cases, 2,865 patients are in isolation at designated hospitals and are stable, while 78 are in ICU.

The ten dead include- seven from Bengaluru urban, two from Bidar and one from Vijayapura.

Out of the 337 new cases, 93 are returnees from other states, majority of them from neighboring Maharashtra,while 11 are those who returned from other countries.

The remaining cases include contacts of patients earlier tested positive, those with history of SARI and ILI, among others.

Among the districts where the new cases were reported, Bengaluru accounted for 138 cases, followed by Kalaburagi 52, Ballari 37, Hassan 18, Dakshina Kannada 13, Davangere 12, Udupi 11; Bidar 10, six each from Mysuru and Koppal, four each from Yadgir, Kolar and Bengaluru rural, three each from Mandya, Dharwad, Chikkaballapura, Bagalkote and Ramanagara, two each from Tumakuru and Chikkamagaluru, and one each from Belagavi, Uttara Kannada and Shivamogga.

Kalaburagi district tops the list of positive cases, with 1,126 infections, followed by Udupi 1,050 and Bengaluru urban 982.

Among discharges Udupi tops the list with 944 discharges, followed by Kalaburagi 646 and Yadgir 477.

A total of 4,84,060 samples were tested so far, out of which 10,553 were tested on Thursday alone.

According to the bulletin,4,64,338 samples have been reported as negative, and out of them 9,862 were reported negative today.

Udupi, May 17: A total of 1,460 migrant labourers left for Uttar Pradesh from Indrali Railway Station in Udupi in Shramik Special train on Sunday.

This is the first train to ferry migrant labourers from Udupi. As many as 236 from Karkala, 323 from Kundapura, 901 labourers from Brahmavar, Kaup and Udupi left for their native villages.

More than 2,000 labourers had gathered at the railway station and only 1,460 labourers received tickets to travel.

Those who did not receive tickets were disappointed and got into heated arguments with the officials.

The labourers were promised that they will receive tickets to another train, that would depart from Udupi before May 20. One bogie of the train was reserved for pregnant women, women and children.

As many as 1,712 from Jharkhand, 770 from Odisha, 977 from West Bengal, 1,600 from Bihar, 379 from Madhya Pradesh, 280 from Chattisgarh, 110 from Uttarkhand, 379 from Rajasthan had registered on Seva Sindhu portal.

Additional Deputy Commissioner B Sadashiva Prabhu said that there are plans to make arrangements to send migrant labourers from UP, Uttaranchal, Madhya Pradesh and Jharkhand.

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.