From our perspective, encamped in Maine under several feet of snow, the events occurring in the Middle East are a curiosity. The uprisings across the Arab world appear in many ways to be virtuous: classic cases of unhappy citizens rising up against unpopular and repressive governments.
There are many trends that the protesters can rightly blame on their rulers: unemployment, lack of freedom, police brutality, corruption and demographics.
While I approve of these events and hope for the success of democracy in the region, one essential and disturbing truth remains: one of the main causes of the demonstrations cannot be blamed on, or cured by, any government.
Back in 2008, before the full force of the recession became apparent, the world had been buckling under the weight of record-high food prices. There were protests across the developing world, and even mild shortages of some foodstuffs in the United States.
Current food prices are already a few percentage points above their 2008 peak, and they are expected to soar even higher.
The initial protests in Tunisia were motivated more by the difficulty of subsistence than by any political motive. The suicides and marches were the result of a population fed up with hunger and joblessness.
If the Tunisians had not feared physical hardship, there would in all likelihood have been few protesters, and there would have been no protests to spark revolt across the Arab world.
Hungry people do desperate things, and when combined with repression and stewing discontent, an empty belly leads to radicalism. Last year, Egypt was considered one of the most stable countries in the region, a conclusion that seems ludicrous today.
The causes of these prices made the problem even more intractable. Governments are quick to blame speculators in order to redirect anger from themselves, but the rising prices do not show the signs of a bubble.
On the contrary, simple supply and demand seems to be at work. Inventories are low, and no one is stockpiling food except countries with governments that fear unrest. American snowstorms and Australian floods—not traders in suits—appear to be the real culprits.
This does leave room for hope. When the next growing season starts, it will likely be less plagued by disaster than the current one. The question is, how many dictatorships will survive that long.
Here we are in the second month of the year, and a Wikipedia search for "2011 protests" already yields more than half a dozen hits, including Egypt, Yemen, Tunisia, Algeria, Syria and Jordan. No wonder the Saudi government is decrying the would-be revolutions.
Just as in 2008, the developed world is starting to feel the effects. Insulated as we are from the production processes of the goods we consume, food prices tend to take a while to make it into the American collective consciousness.
But Kellogg is already hiking up the prices of its cereals, and many other firms are sure to follow. Perhaps the Federal Reserve will finally receive the inflation it has been wanting for so long.
The question is, "What is there to do?" Whatever many conspiracy theorists may think, governments aren't all-powerful.
We cannot conjure food into being. Last time around, a recession conveniently appeared and drove down demand and thus prices, but I do not think anyone wants that to happen again.
Most possible demand reductions come from developed countries, but price signals are going to have to be very strong in order for consumers to react.
If we cannot get people to reduce their food waste in the dining halls, how is anyone going to persuade the average American to conserve provisions before grocery bills skyrocket?
By the time the price changes cascade down into our shopping carts, how many more results there will be on the Wikipedia search?
If food prices are the nudge that many unhappy populations need in order to install democracies, then perhaps they will be, in retrospect, a good thing.
But the real risk is that skyrocketing prices are part of a cycle that the world is falling further and further into.
If we have fallen into a Malthusian trap in which we simply cannot feed the world's population, it is hard to see a way out that will not involve rampant suffering.
For now, we can watch and wait, hoping that a bumper crop next year will ease supply shortages, but if prices are set to jump every few years into the foreseeable future, the world will be a very different and much less stable place.
In the words of the U.N. World Food Program's Executive Director, "If people don't have enough to eat they only have three options: they can revolt, they can migrate or they can die."
In the coming years, many more people may have to make that same, terrible choice, and it's unclear if any of the options will really lead to relief.