Similarities between France before the first revolution and USA today

A quick look at the conditions in France in 1789 shows many similarities between France before the first revolution and USA today. There were 3 main factors which defined the socio-economic conditions in pre-revolution France: rising prices of food, bankruptcy due to wars and opposition to financial reforms. An excerpt from wikipedia (provided at the bottom of this post) gives s detailed description of each of these factors.

Rising Prices of Food

Food was one of the most common necessities in 18th century France. Rising food prices put the general population of France in a lot of distress and also caused widespread hunger in the lower echelons of French society. This is often seen the one of the main driving forces of the French revolution.

The current situation in America is not as bad as it was in France. A large portion of Americans find themselves unemployed and unable to find feed themselves and their family without help from the government. This help exists in the form of unemployment benefits and food stamps and has decreased the amount of dissent that would normally be caused by hunger. However, this program has come under fire recently as Republicans in the House and the Senate threatened to let these benefits expire unless the inheritance tax on properties was decreased. President Obama was eventually forced to agree to a decrease in inheritance tax in order to maintain unemployment benefits and save a signification portion of the population from starvation. If these benefits stop existing, it would lead to widespread hunger and discontent, resulting in a situation similar to pre-revolution France.

Another important point to note here is the rising price of gasoline today. The rise in gasoline prices leads to an increase in transportation costs for all goods and thus an increase in the price of all goods, including food. One major difference between France in the 18th century and USA in the 21st century is our dependence on gasoline. An average American uses 3-5 gallons of gasoline per day commuting to and from their workplace (this number would be lower for those who use energy-efficient cars). Due to an under-developed public transportation system, long commutes and our dependence on gasoline for transportation, gasoline has become a important necessity, just like food. Thus, the effect of rising gasoline prices today is similar to the rising prices of food in 18th century France.

A drastic increase in the price of gasoline or a sudden loss of benefits leading to widespread starvation would create a political environment similar to the one during pre-revolution France.

The following excerpt was taken from wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_revolution#Causes):

"Adherents of most historical models identify many of the same features of the Ancien Régime as being among the causes of the Revolution. Economic factors included hunger and malnutrition in the most destitute segments of the population, due to rising bread prices (from a normal 8 sous for a four-pound loaf to 12 sous by the end of 1789),^[3] after several years of poor grain harvests. Bad harvests (caused in part by extreme weather from El Niñoalong with volcanic activity at Laki and Grímsvötn in 1783–1784), rising food prices, and an inadequate transportation system that hindered the shipment of bulk foods from rural areas to large population centers contributed greatly to the destabilization of French society in the years leading up to the Revolution.

Another cause was the state's effective bankruptcy due to the enormous cost of previous wars, particularly the financial strain caused by French participation in the American Revolutionary War. The national debt amounted to some 1,000–2,000 million^{[citation needed]} livres. The social burdens caused by war included the huge war debt, made worse by the loss of France's colonial possessions in North America and the growing commercial dominance of Great Britain. France's inefficient and antiquated financial system was unable to manage the national debt, something which was both partially caused and exacerbated by the burden of an inadequate system of taxation. To obtain new money to head off default on the government's loans, the king called an Assembly of Notables in 1787.

Meanwhile, the royal court at Versailles was seen as being isolated from, and indifferent to, the hardships of the lower classes. While in theory King Louis XVI was an absolute monarch, in practice he was often indecisive and known to back down when faced with strong opposition. While he did reduce government expenditures, opponents in the parlements successfully thwarted his attempts at enacting much needed reforms. Those who were opposed to Louis' policies further undermined royal authority by distributing pamphlets (often reporting false or exaggerated information) that criticized the government and its officials, stirring up public opinion against the monarchy.^[4]"

Consequences of Immortality

In March 2010, humans were finally able to grow a new organ from stem cells and successfully transplant it as a working organ: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article7068514.ece This article outlines how stem cells were used to create a new trachea for a 10-year old boy.

While this advancement in medicine is relatively new, it holds great promise. It shows that stems cells can indeed be used to create new organs, and has emboldened researchers to take larger steps by trying to create other organs such as heart, liver, eyes, pancreas, etc. At this stage, creating skin from stem cells is also being done; the current plan is to make this into a commercial avenue within the next 10 years by growing skin from one's stem cells and transplanting it back onto their body. There is also a prize-foundation which promises to award researchers for being the first ones to create a certain organ. All this leads me to believe that humans will soon figure out how to grow organs from anyone's stem cells. This, coupled with advances in nanotechnology, genetics and liposome formulation create a legitimate possibility that every disease and disorder known to man will someday have a cure.

Soon, humans will wield the power of immortality. For example, an 80-year old with a dying heart can simply grow a new heart and have it transplanted, thereby extending this life. He can keep doing this for every organ which may start failing, including skin. It is no longer a question whether or not humans can be immortal; the question now is what happens after we develop technologies to achieve immortality? How will this affect the population crisis we are already facing? How would it alter the political, economic and social rules of the world today? How will we decide whether people who are dying but do not have enough money to buy/grow new organs deserve to die or deserve to be saved? This blog will take a quick look at the consequences of immortality in a way no one has discussed before. This discussion will raise more questions than it answers. The main goal of this discussion is to get you, the reader thinking about the questions we will soon face. You will soon find these issues as the center of many great debates ( official political debates as well as unofficial debates between friends). Please think about these issues and spread the word, making others think about these issues as well.


Immortality: who gets to have it?
After technologies for immortality are developed, they will certainly become a part of available medical procedures. However, these procedures may cost extravagant sums of money, since they help prevent death and the demand for them would be nearly insatiable. The costs may be so high that it is safe to assume not everyone will be able to afford it. In fact, it would be surprising for anyone not in the upper class of income (those in middle and lower classes) to be able to afford immortality. Will we as a nation then set up government funded immortality-alternatives to those who cannot afford it, similar to the current healthcare system. Will procedures for immortality become a part of Medicare and Medicaid? If not, where do we draw the line?


Immortality and population crisis
If we make these procedures publicly funded and available to everyone, mortality rates would be 0 or nearly 0. As a world, we are already facing a population crisis. There are already over 10 billion people in the world today, and that number will increase exponentially. Many leading researchers estimate that starvation will become a major problem by 2050. The lack of mortality will certainly make this problem much, much worse. It is unlikely that people will stop reproducing. The population would increase due to births, but never decrease due to death. Add to this the possibility that some of those who alive for longer periods of time due to immortality-procedures are likely to procreate themselves, and you come to realize the population explosion we will see once these things become a reality. While large leaps are made in field of medicine, negligible amount of attention is paid to the ever growing problem of starvation. So which method of unfortunate demise do we chose for the less fortunate? Death due to an inability to gather funds to save your dying self? Or death due to starvation? Do we even publicly fund procedures for someone who has a high chance of dying from starvation due to low income?


Immortality: Economic consequences
This push towards immortality not only makes you live longer, but can also improve your body in order to reverse aging. Therefore, the mandatory retirement age of 65 would no longer make sense. There could possibly be 80- or 90-year olds with new organs and limbs who are more fit to work than 60 year olds with no transplants. This increases the available working force, without increasing the opportunities for jobs. As the population explodes and the old still keep working, it would undoubtedly lead to increasing unemployment. This is but one effect of immortality on economics

Second, and more important effect, would be the fact the those who are insanely rich (Buffet, Gates, I'm looking at you) would be able to best afford these immortality-procedures for a long, LONG time. If this were to happen, people like them could go on to live for many generations, and in turn amass more wealth and power. At what point do these individuals become too powerful? In a capitalistic economy and society, can we ever say one individual has become too powerful? How would the prolonged existence of such power-barons affect economics on a large scale?

Immortality: Political consequences
Now extend that thought to politics. Think not only of American politics, but of politics world wide. What if Kim-Jong Il could afford these procedures and decide to forever rule North Korea? What if American politicians, who would again be able to afford these procedures, become permanent fixtures in the Senate and the House? What if the Queen never dies, and Prince Charles forever remains a prince? How does that affect the political workings within these nations and between these nations?


Immortality: Social consequences
What if you could be immortal and reverse aging? Would you simply spend your life in pursuit of happiness. Would you have more children or simply spend your days working and enjoying life? Would anything about you change at all? If you did have more children, how close would you be with all your children?


While we do not face any of these issues yet, we will face these issues soon, and within our lifetimes. If we start discussing these issues now, we will be ready to deal with them when we face them. If we decide to put off this discussion until it becomes "relevant", these issues will blind side us. In a rapidly changing world, its best if we see the change coming and plan accordingly. So get talking to those who you think would care, and lets starting looking at this issue with a more serious note.

- Kevat Shah

Age of the Indian Renaissance - Kevat Shah

"Renaissance" was a word used to describe the scientific, artistic and cultural revolution which changed Europe from 14th to 17th centuries. Similar changes have been seen in numerous civilizations before and after. The most striking of these other Renaissances were the Age of Renaissance in Athens during the time of Socrates and Plato, as well as the Age of the American Renaissance, which began in the 17th century and still seems to be continuing today.

During these Renaissances, many new ideologies were introduced. These ideologies changed the way people thought and acted. For example, after the death of Socrates, people of Athens became less afraid to think independently, as evident from the writings of Plato. Likewise, in 14th century Europe, thinkers like Leonardo Da Vinci and Michealangelo challenged the popular belief system through novel innovations and artistic ideas. This allowed men like Gallileo, Newton and Copernicus to believe in what they thought was true. The same can be said about the Founding Fathers of America, the men who lead the American Renaissance. Benjamin Franklin refused to believe the widely accepted "facts" about lightning, allowing him to understand electricity. Therefore, we can safely assume that "thinking outside the box" and believing in your own ideas are an integral part of being a "Renaissance Man".

Another interesting fact to note is that all the Ages of Renaissance were preceded by a long dark age. In ancient Athens, a long war with Sparta preceded the coming of Socrates. The European Renaissance was also preceded by the "Dark Ages" full of war, famine and the black plague (10th - 13th centuries). The American Renassiance was preceded by 200 years of colonization of a wild land, as well as wars with the England, Spain and France and Native Americans. While the years preceding the Renaissance seem to be full of misery and seem to lack of stability, the years at the beginning of each Renaissance seem to be peaceful when compared to the years preceding them. In Athens, war against Sparta had come to a standstill and a period of peace had begun. In 14th century Europe, nations had begun unifying themselves as feudalism came to an end, ushering in an era of relative peace. In 17th century America, Americans had finally organized themselves into a nation allowing them to fight all other forces against them, which again, led to an era of relative peace.

Therefore, it follows that there are 2 things neccesary for an Age of Renaissance to begin. First, there need to independent thinkers not afraid to speak their mind. Second, and Age of Renaissance is almost always an era of peace preceded by an age of darkness.

For the last 1000 years, India has been torn by war. Of these, the last 400 years under Mughal and British Empires have been the darkest days India has seen. However, since gaining independence, India has become a relatively safer and more peaceful place. There is a movement in India towards education. Having a good education is considered the most important thing needed for success. As more and more Indians become educated, there will be more Indians, such as myself, who are not afraid to think of novel ideas or to speak their mind.

An age of darkness followed by an age of enlightement, along with the presence of independent fearless thinkers is what defines a Renaissance. According to that definition, a new age is just beginning in the history of India: The Age of the Indian Renaissance.

- Kevat Shah

Prophecies of Science - Kevat Shah

Prophecies are usually ideas and claims which predict certain events of the future. Science is in itself prophetic; the entire purpose of the scientific method is to first find the truth and then extrapolate from it information about the future. Each scientific publication starts out with a "hypothesis" (what the scientist thinks will happen). When new information is found and understood, it is used to determine or at least make an educated guess about the future. These are the prophecies of science: Claims made by science to be true (aka theories), but have not been proven yet.

In this blog, I am going to undertake the mammoth task of putting together everything I know and understand, and using this information to hypothesize, theorize and prophesize the future. I intend to address any and all fields and make claims about future events based on logical reasoning. Some of the ideas I plan to address include: the Theory of Everything (Physics), future of machines and robots, the political landscape, Pyschohistory, Medicine, etc.

In each of these fields, I will put forth new ideas which have not yet come true. I hope that everyone who reads this blog enjoys reading it and will partake in discussing what the future possibly holds for us.