Tourism industry badly hit in Kodagu due to natural calamity

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, Mar 30: The nationwide lockdown has left the state on the brink of a fresh agrarian crisis.

The lack of transport facilities spells doom for ready-to-harvest grapes worth Rs 500-600 crore in Bengaluru Rural, Chikkaballapur and Kolar districts. Unable to find buyers, several farmers have begun dumping their produce into compost pits.

On Sunday, Munishamappa, a farmer in Chikkaballapur, emptied four truckloads of grapes into the pit as buyers didn’t turn up due to the lockdown. “If the grapes wither and fall to the ground, it will affect the soil’s fertility and I will be forced to dispose of them,” he said.

Venkata Krishnappa, Munishamappa’s son, said their 1.5-acre vineyard yielded 25 tonnes of grapes. “Just before the lockdown, 10 tonnes were harvested and delivered to the market. Due to lack of transport, buyers haven’t turned up for the remaining 15 tonnes which we are dumping into the pit.”

For latest updates on coronavirus outbreak, click here

Anjaneya Reddy, a farmer leader, said that in Chikkaballapur alone, they have cultivated grapes on 2,000 acres. “Even if you consider 15 tonnes per acre as yield, there are about 30,000 tonnes ready to be harvested in the district. At a market rate of Rs 50 to Rs 60 per kilogram, the net worth will be Rs 200 crore to Rs 300 crore. And if you consider the crop in Kolar and Bengaluru Rural, grapes worth Rs 500 to Rs 600 crore are at stake,” he explained.

The ‘Dilkush’ grapes is the most preferred variety of domestic consumption, according to the farmers.

This apart, farmers would have invested about Rs 3 lakh to 4 lakh per acre on fertilisers, pesticide and labour. “With markets being shut and no of the transport facilities available, farmers are forced to dump their produce into pits. It is high time the government intervened and provided us with market options so that farmers can sell at an affordable price of Rs 30 to 40,” Reddy said.

Somu, a farmer in Ganjam village of Srirangapattana, dumped two tonnes of chikku (sapota) citing market shutdown in Mandya. Reddy appealed to the government to emulate the Maharashtra model where the government is helping farmers market fruits through Hopcoms or dairy units as nutrient supplements to people.

Bengaluru, Apr 9: 10 new positive cases have been confirmed in Karnataka, apart from the recent fatality of an 80-year-old woman from Gadag district, the health department said on Thursday.

The fresh cases have been reported in the state from last evening to Thursday noon.

Till date, 191 COVID-19 positive cases have been confirmed, which includes 6 deaths and 28 discharges, the update said.

Among the 10 positive cases, eight are contacts of patients who have already tested positive- one each from Belagavi, Mandya and Chikkaballapura, two from Mysuru, and three from Bagalkote; while two from Bengaluru city are with a travel history to Delhi.

Three cases from Bagalkote are children- two boys of 4 and 13 years of age, and one girl of 9 years old.

The elderly woman died on April 8 in Gadag, the department said in its mid-day situation update.

Confirming that her reports tested positive on April 7, officials had said, she had a history of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SARI).