The KEEZHADI Dilemma

 

The KEEZHADI Dilemma

Sa Ra Va Na Ba Va 

(Damizhi Script)

The reason buzz in the Indian archaeology and political circle was the discovery of an early civilization predating/contemporary to the Indus Valley Civilization. The excavations at Keezhadi (13 km from the city of Madurai), part of the emerging Vaigai Valley Civilization (VVC) in Tamil Nadu, have sparked a foundational shift in how we understand the origins and development of Indian civilization. Dating from as early as 6th century BCE, with some evidence potentially indicating earlier cultural continuity, Keezhadi appears to reflect an urbanized, literate society with a high degree of socio-economic complexity. This timeline places the VVC not only contemporaneous with the later phases of the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) but raises the possibility of an even earlier or parallel development trajectory in the Indian subcontinent's south.

This revelation challenges the long-standing narrative that civilizational impulses originated in the northwest (IVC), migrated to the Gangetic plains, and eventually disseminated to peninsular India. That linear diffusion model which rooted in colonial historiography has deeply influenced academic discourse, school curricula, and popular imagination in India. Keezhadi disrupts this by suggesting that South India may have developed urban, literate settlements independently, potentially even predating the so-called Vedic or Aryan movements into the subcontinent.

The Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT), popularized by 19th-century philologists like Max Müller, held that Indo-European-speaking "Aryans" invaded and supplanted the existing Dravidian culture in India. This narrative, while originally shaped by colonial race theory, became institutionalized in Indian academic and political thought, especially post-independence. However, modern genome research and archaeological analysis have largely debunked this theory.

Genetic studies, including the landmark 2019 paper by Narasimhan et al. published in Science, indicate multiple waves of migrations into South Asia, but no evidence of a large-scale, violent invasion. (“The formation of human populations in South and Central Asia,” was published in the journal Science, specifically in Science 365 (issue 6457): eaat7487, with the publication date being September 5, 2019). Instead, the data suggest gradual admixture over centuries, with a strong genetic continuity in southern populations.

Archaeologists such as B.B. Lal and more recently Michel Danino and Tony Joseph have highlighted the lack of material evidence, as no destruction layers nor abrupt cultural disruptions are evident to support the traditional invasion narrative. This leaves us with a more nuanced understanding that Indo-European speakers may have migrated into the subcontinent, but they did not bring civilization to a blank slate. Where cultures like the Sangam-era settlements, as evidenced by Keezhadi, were already flourishing then.

Historically, the British utilized the AIT to justify colonial domination, by portraying themselves as "later Aryans" bringing order to a fragmented native population. Post-independence, dominant political narratives, largely shaped by the northern elite, continued to favor Gangetic-centric histories, emphasizing Vedic traditions and Sanskritic heritage as civilizational benchmarks.

Against this backdrop, the implications of Keezhadi were understandably contentious. Reports emerged that the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), under central oversight, allegedly pressured field officers to modify or delay findings that could challenge the existing paradigm. The officer who initially led the excavation, K. Amarnath Ramakrishna, was transferred, sparking criticism from academic and civil society circles.

Sensing both cultural significance and political opportunity, the Tamil Nadu government, led by the DMK, stepped in to continue the excavations through the State Department of Archaeology, rebranding the site as emblematic of Tamil antiquity and Dravidian heritage. While critics argue that this move was politically motivated, to bolster regional identity and claim historical primacy, it nonetheless ensured the continuity of a major excavation that could reshape Indian historiography.

Regardless of political motivations, the discoveries at Keezhadi, and in the broader Vaigai Valley region, are forcing a re-evaluation of long-standing assumptions that urbanization and literacy in South India appear to have developed independently of Aryan or Vedic influence. Tamil-Brahmi script found at Keezhadi shows evidence of early literacy in Tamil, aligning with classical Sangam literature references, which themselves suggest a rich cultural and political history.

The sheer sophistication of the artifacts, such as brick structures, industrial-scale pottery, and evidence of trade, mirrors features found in mature Harappan sites, suggesting South India was not peripheral but central to India’s civilizational arc.

Keezhadi does more than just elevate Tamil Nadu’s historical status, it opens the door to a pluralistic, multi-origin view of Indian civilization, one that moves beyond the binaries of Aryan vs Dravidian or North vs South. This shift is essential not only for academic accuracy but for national integrity, allowing every region to see itself not as a recipient of history, but as a contributor to it.

To fully embrace the implications of Keezhadi, India must decentralize historical narratives, support independent and transparent archaeological research, and allow evidence, not ideology, to shape its understanding of the past.

ravivarmmankkanniappan@155912072025 2.7278° N, 101.9454° E

TRUMPONOMICS

 

“For decades, our country has been looted, pillaged, raped and plundered by nations near and far, both friend and foe alike,”-  Donald Trump .

While dramatic in tone, this sentiment resonates with a significant portion of the American public. However, this narrative of victimhood is, at best, only half the truth. The forces that have shaped America’s current predicament—economically, politically, and socially—have largely been born from within its own institutions. The Freemasons, the CIA, and sprawling American corporations, independently and sometimes in concert, have wielded an arsenal of instruments—economic pressure, covert operations, political interference, and outright military interventions—to construct and maintain global supremacy. This architecture of dominance, built on fragile moral and economic foundations, is now unravelling. What Trump laments is, in many ways, the blowback from decades of unchecked ambition.

Historically, American foreign and economic policy has often prioritized corporate interests and geopolitical leverage over ethical considerations. The CIA’s role in the 1953 Iranian coup (Operation Ajax), orchestrated in part to protect the interests of British Petroleum, is one such example. So too is the infamous United Fruit-backed coup in Guatemala in 1954, aimed at safeguarding American business interests under the guise of anti-communism. These interventions were not anomalies—they were features of a system in which American corporations and agencies played god in foreign lands, reshaping sovereign nations in pursuit of resource control and market access.

Fast forward to the modern era, and this imperialistic model has come full circle. The very forces that once extended America’s reach are now implicated in its decline. Deindustrialization, the offshoring of jobs, and the rise of the financialized economy were not orchestrated by foreign powers, but by domestic elites and institutions seeking short-term profit over long-term stability. The very corporations that once profited from empire-building now exploit global labour arbitrage, hollowing out the American middle class in the process.

In this context, Donald Trump emerges not merely as a populist, but as a gunslinger—an erratic, self-styled saviour trying to patch a sinking ship with brute rhetoric and protectionist tools. His approach to global affairs can best be described through the lens of "brinkmanship"—a negotiation tactic that involves pushing a situation to the edge of crisis to compel the other side to concede. Trump wielded this aggressively during his trade wars with China, in his strong-arm renegotiation of NAFTA (culminating in the USMCA), and in his loud criticisms of NATO members and the European Union. The objective was simple: make the other party believe they had more to lose by not making a deal.

This is the essence of what many observers have dubbed the “Trump Doctrine”—not a formal geopolitical theory, but a recognizable pattern of behaviour marked by disruption, unpredictability, and a hyper-transactional worldview. The Doctrine rejects multilateralism in favour of bilateral arm-wrestling. It prizes short-term wins over long-term relationships. It uses pressure, not persuasion, and thrives on keeping allies and adversaries alike uncertain about what comes next. In essence, Trump brought the drama and brinkmanship of The Apprentice to the world stage—this time, the boardroom was global, and the stakes far greater.

America today is ensnared in its own fragmented narratives. The unity that once held under the myth of exceptionalism is breaking down. Competing ideologies, alternative facts, and polarized media have created an epistemological chaos. Trump’s brash diagnosis of decline—though simplistic—speaks to the disorientation many Americans feel. He offers no nuanced policy blueprint, but a kind of political catharsis. He channels rage, nostalgia, and distrust into action, regardless of whether the solutions are viable in the long term.

Can he pull off his histrionic crusade? That remains to be seen. Economics, after all, is not a hard science. It is interpretive, contingent, and often shaped more by perception and power than by theory. Throughout history, many policies dismissed by the academic consensus have found unexpected success—or at least, political efficacy. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal was derided by orthodox economists of the time. More recently, Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), once ridiculed, is now entering mainstream fiscal debates.

If economists themselves can’t agree on foundational issues—from inflation drivers to fiscal multipliers—then why should Trump's actions be judged solely by traditional metrics? He may not be a scholar or a statesman, but he has demonstrated an uncanny ability to tap into the collective psyche. And that, in the realm of politics, can be more potent than technical correctness.

Ultimately, the Trump phenomenon is less about the man than the moment—a nation reckoning with its own contradictions, seeking clarity in chaos, and flirting with the idea that perhaps, just perhaps, the loudest man in the room might be the one holding the mirror.

ravivarmmankkanniappan@1757040420253.0567° N, 101.5851° E

The End Of FEIGNED DIPLOMACY

The White House Meeting

(Screenshot from Youtube)

I was watching the diatribe in Washington recently when both Trump and Vance went on a diatribe against Zelensky. It almost sounded like an Indian talk show where they invite a guest, together with a few others who have an opposing view of the main guest, and everyone will target the main guest with barrage of offensive spews. With the thumping of noise, eventually the poor guest will give up arguing and end up looking like an incompetent fool.

What particularly caught my attention are articles written by Pro Democrats describing how Trump had nailed the end of global political diplomacy via his uncouth behaviour against his guest, Zelenskyy at the White House.

But looking deeper into this entire episode I find it reeks western hypocrisy since the “Great Game”. The Great Game was an era from the early 19^th century where both the British and Russian empires were turmoiled in strategic rivalry to exert influence in Central Asia. This parasitic hypocrisy festered exponentially, from colonial expansion under the guise of civilising missions, to contemporary interventions, camouflaged as “humanitarian aids”.     

This led me to relook at an old frustration with the modern systems of political diplomacy, particularly within Western framework.

Western polity today have come to believe that they own and are the guardian of democracy and hence they have peddled that Political diplomacy and political correctness to be the pillars of modern democratic discourse. The purpose of it all is to maintain civility, avoid unnecessary conflicts, and promote dialogue among nations, communities, and individuals. But history has taught us bitter lessons, where these very mechanisms had and can prolong conflicts and exacerbate further problems.

Political diplomacy often involves negotiation, compromise, and avoidance of confrontational language. While this can be effective in certain circumstances, it sometimes delays necessary actions. By focusing on tact, subtlety, and consensus, difficult issues may be deferred or watered down, never fully addressed. This is especially true in cases of deep-rooted systemic injustice, where addressing the "elephant in the room" requires hard choices and uncomfortable truths.

Case in point, the Israel-Palestine conflict. It when through decades of negotiations, peace accords, and UN resolutions, but todate negotiating parties have avoided direct confrontation with core issues, such occupation, settlements, and state of displaced populations. So, what we see is, in the name of political tact and compromise, the powers that be have skirted urgent action, prolonging suffering and instability instead of addressing systemic injustices with decisive, uncomfortable solutions.

In the form of political correctness, which was originally the outcome of cultural sensitivity and awareness, it prevents political leadership from speaking bluntly about uncomfortable topics, even when those topics demand urgent attention. For example, the unwillingness to confront inequalities or histories of exploitation head-on, out of fear of offending certain groups, may inadvertently perpetuate the very issues one aims to resolve.

This was evident in South Africa’s post-apartheid transition. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) prioritized national unity over full accountability, granting amnesty to many perpetrators of apartheid-era crimes. On one hand this fostered peace, but on the other it failed to address the more pressing economic inequalities which stemmed from historical exploitation. Hence the failure to confront this systemic injustice ended up with wider socio-economic disparity.

Therefore, in times of a transparent digital connect today, the notion of discreet hidden agenda is no longer viable nor judicious. The Cambridge Analytica scandal is one good example of how digital transparency exposes covert political agendas. In 2018, it was revealed that Cambridge Analytica had harvested data from millions of Facebook users without consent, using it to influence elections, including the 2016 U.S. presidential race and the Brexit referendum. This incident highlighted the erosion of privacy and the need for greater oversight in digital political strategies, and it goes to show nothing goes without scrutiny of the masses.

It is about time political statesmanship approaches both global or domestic issues, in a direct, confrontational approach and break the cycle of evasive diplomacy.

This recalls the philosophy of pragmatism, propounded by the likes of William James and John Dewy, where they believe that solutions must be judged by its practical consequences rather than adherence to abstract principles, case in point political diplomacy and political correctness. Therefore, a pragmatic approach would cease diplomatic courtesy over actually solving the problem at hand.

We have seen in history; bold actions had been necessary evil to halt further sufferings. In the case of slavery in the American history, the Civil War, which was considered a direct and violent confrontation that, while tragic, was a necessary response to the inability of diplomacy to address the problem. At the end of World War II, negotiations failed under the Potsdam Declaration for Japan to surrender unconditionally. All diplomacy failed even with USSR onboard the process. The failed diplomacy to end the Pacific war led the US to go for an atomic strike on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. By no means to justify the act, it appears that it was the only pragmatic way to jolt the Japanese to concede surrender. Hence the phrase “to catch the bull by its horn” though appears hardnosed would be an unflinching stance to achieve meaningful solution in global politics.

The "Western political gentlemanship" which is bounded by a system that has been built upon a façade of civility, often comes with the risk of maintaining the status quo, particularly when power structures benefit from the existing situation. The irony is this construct disguises the truth by using diplomacy as a shield to avoid confronting uncomfortable baggage that the Western powers carry.

Philosophically, Nietzsche argues that moral codes and ethical structures can be a form of weakness, hiding the true will to power. In diplomacy, moralizing or portraying it as the universal solution, can serve as a cloak to evade addressing the deep-seated power imbalances that shape international relations or even domestic policies. Interestingly Western political elites had for time immemorial have engaged in these practices not out of genuine concern for fairness, but because these systems serve their interests and uphold a facade of legitimacy.

So, did Trump expose the elephant in the room? Far too long the leftist media had portrayed Zelensky as the victim but never once attempted to explore his role in the entire conflict. Putin (not an angel himself), was a convenient entity to put the entire blame on, and the media pandered to this gallery.

Hence it will be apt to give a philosophical twist to expound the limits of politeness and diplomacy. Jean-Paul Sartre, the existentialist, postulates that individuals and societies often choose to ignore uncomfortable truths because facing them would demand responsibility and action. Hence Sartre says, this avoidance is a form of bad faith or simply put an act of self-deception that shields stakeholders from the consequences of their own freedom and the responsibility to change things.

Philosophically, acknowledging the elephant means being willing to confront not just the obvious political issues at hand but also the willingness to accept accountability for the historical, structural, and systemic factors that have allowed the conflicting issues to exist and persist.

Interestingly, this confrontational style embraces the discomfort of acknowledging that, at times, the structures of diplomacy and political correctness serve the interests of the powerful rather than those they purport to protect.

Candor is essential in seeking an amicable solution to any conflict, particularly in global politics. The need for honest and openness in confronting political issues, must be a given, particularly when the current systems of diplomacy and political correctness seem to either sidestep or perpetuate these problems. While diplomacy and political correctness have their merits in maintaining peace and civility, there are times when these mechanisms fail to address the core issues at hand, and direct action is necessary. This incident underscores a willingness to confront uncomfortable truths about power dynamics, moving beyond polite conventions to address systemic issues directly.

The Oval Office meeting between Trump, Zelenskyy, and JD Vance exemplifies this confrontational approach that challenges traditional diplomatic norms.

Philosophically, this aligns with pragmatic, existential, and Nietzschean ideas that urge individuals and societies to stop hiding behind polite conventions and face the hard truths that can lead to real change. This, however, comes with a cost, the willingness to accept discomfort and potentially contentious action.

“Never underestimate the sly of a person, Trump is not a clown, nor Zelenskyy an angel.”

Cheers.

ravivarmmankkanniappan@1241030320253.0571° N, 101.5911° E

The Maha Kumbh Mela and Quantum Mechanics

 

The Way To Triveni Sangam

In quantum mechanics, time and space are not fixed constructs but infinite, fluid dimensions where reality exists in superposition. The linear perception of time, a mere human construct, dissolves in the quantum realm, where past, present, and future coexist. Particles behave probabilistically, moving with apparent free will, neither bound by causality nor confined to a singular path. The universe, in this view, is a boundless quantum field, constantly shifting, where existence is not a sequence but an interconnected whole. Without a definitive beginning or end, what we call "reality" is but a fleeting wave in an infinite ocean of possibilities. So a simple observation of nature is all about nothing. Since reality is an infinite quantum field, any observation is merely a transient interaction within an ever-shifting wave. What we perceive as nature is an illusion—nothing but fleeting probabilities.

Ramana Maharshi

This contention is identical to the thoughts and philosophy of Ramana Maharshi which is the prescription of Vedanta Philosophy.

Quantum physics suggests that reality is a superposition of possibilities, with particles existing in multiple states until observed. This aligns with Vedanta’s idea that the perceived world is Maya—an illusion created by the mind. According to Vedanta, our perception of reality is not absolute but conditioned by our consciousness. Ramana Maharshi emphasized self-inquiry (Atma Vichara), urging seekers to question the very nature of their existence, ultimately revealing that the self and the universe are one indivisible whole.

In quantum mechanics, the observer effect highlights how observation collapses a wavefunction into a definite state. Similarly, Vedanta teaches that the mind, through identification and perception, constructs the illusion of separation. If the observer withdraws their identification with form and time, what remains is pure consciousness—akin to the un-collapsed quantum field of infinite potential.

The notion that time is a human construct resonates deeply with Advaita Vedanta, which posits that past, present, and future are mere projections of the mind. In the ultimate state, beyond duality, existence is timeless and boundless, just as quantum physics suggests a reality beyond deterministic cause and effect. Thus, both quantum mechanics and Vedanta converge on the idea that reality is an ever-shifting, interconnected field of potential, where what we call "nature" is but a fleeting manifestation of the infinite. The key, according to Vedanta, is to transcend illusion and recognize the eternal self—the substratum of all existence.

Hence to understand consciousness, a spiritual seeker should practice Atma Vichara (self-inquiry), asking, "Who am I?" Ramana Maharshi propounds the notion of self-enquiry, which is the process to dissolve egoic illusions, to reveal pure awareness. Meditation and mindfulness is known to help transcend time-bound perception, aligning with the quantum field of infinite potential. Therefore, detaching from transient phenomena, observing without attachment, and surrendering to the present moment would lead to direct experiential knowledge. True realization arises when the seeker recognizes that consciousness is not personal but the infinite, formless essence of existence itself.

Naga Baba at the Kumbh Mela

Sivapuranam, a devotional hymn to Lord Shiva, deeply resonates with Vedanta philosophy and even parallels quantum mechanics in its understanding of reality. The hymn glorifies Shiva as the ultimate, formless reality (Brahman), beyond duality, time, and space. This aligns with Advaita Vedanta, which teaches that the world of separateness is an illusion (Maya), and true knowledge comes from realizing the non-dual, infinite self. By surrendering to Shiva, devotees dissolve their ego, transcending the limitations of individuality and merging with the absolute.

From a quantum perspective, reality exists as a superposition of possibilities until observed, similar to Vedanta’s idea that the material world is not independently real but shaped by consciousness. The hymn’s devotion symbolizes a shift from identification with transient forms to recognition of the infinite field of existence—just as quantum physics describes the universe as an interconnected energy field rather than fixed matter.

By meditating on Shiva, the seeker quiets the mind, moving beyond perception-based illusions. This echoes both Vedantic self-inquiry and the quantum notion that observation shapes reality. Ultimately, Sivapuranam serves as a bridge, guiding one from egoic limitation to the boundless, eternal awareness that underlies both spiritual realization and quantum existence.

At The Kumbh Mela

The Maha Kumbh Mela, the world's largest spiritual gathering, resonates deeply with Ramana Maharshi’s core teaching of Atma Vichara (self-inquiry), the question “Who am I?”. Seekers from all walks of life gather at the sacred Triveni Sangam in Prayagraj, symbolizing the dissolution of ego and the purification of the self. The confluence of the holy Ganga, Yamuna, and Saraswati is the focal point of this ritual, which holds special significance this time as it marks the 12th year of the 12-cycle event, last occurring 144 years ago. The act of bathing in the holy waters represents shedding illusion (Maya), much like Ramana’s teaching, which urges seekers to go beyond the false identification with body and mind.

Greeja, my nephew Yuhain and I took our bath on Shatilla Ekadesi (an important day for Lord Vishnu) day on the 25^th January 2025. This day was also astrologically significant in the sense that it was the day when 7 planets, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, Uranus and Mercury (joining the alignment briefly), making it one of the rarest celestial events. More importantly this alignment is believed to amplify the energies of these planets, which in turn provides an aura for personal transformation and growth. This cosmic intervention is supposed to facilitate the alignment of one’s thoughts, action and goals. While taking our holy dip facing the sun, each of us had our own introspection, and none of us spoke about it, quietly embracing the energy.

At The Triveni Sangam

At that moment, the absoluteness of my existence seemed meaningless—stretching into eternity—though it lasted only a few minutes. I closed my eyes, lost in contemplation.

What eventually brought me back to my senses was the thought of Raviena and Banu, who were celebrating their special day as well. In New Zealand, they had their Registration of Marriage performed, and we had the privilege of witnessing the ceremony live via video, just before we set out for the Holy Dip.

It was an incredibly emotional moment for Greeja and me. Though we felt the sorrow of not being physically present, we were comforted knowing that she was surrounded by wonderful people to witness the occasion. Our emotions deepened even further when we saw her wearing my late father's watch. It felt as though he was there in spirit, watching over her, witnessing her momentous day.

The Union of Raviena and Banu

At that instant, I realized that the path of self-inquiry would not be an easy one. Detaching from worldly bonds is no simple task when one is deeply rooted in attachments, responsibilities, and the accountability that life inevitably brings. The journey inward is profound, yet the ties of love, duty, and relationships remain ever strong, making the pursuit of self-realization both challenging and deeply meaningful.

To me the Kumbh Mela was not just a ritual but an inward journey, where seekers renounce worldly attachments, mirroring Ramana’s path of introspection. The vast congregation reflects the interconnectedness of all beings, reinforcing Vedanta’s idea that the self (Atman) is not separate but one with the absolute reality (Brahman). Just as the seeker inquires “Who am I?” to dissolve ego, the Kumbh Mela provides a space for self-reflection and ultimate realization.

At The Kumbh

For me the journey continues, searching for the beginning, to understand the end.

ravivarmmankkanniappan@2317160220253.0567° N, 101.5851° E