Ibn Khaldun wrote something about nomads conquering the throne because the rulers grew fat and demanded ever higher tributes. Then the nomads became rulers and at first demanded low tributes because they were not used to luxuries anyway, but as timed passed so grew their appetite until it was time for new nomads to conquer the throne.

Fits with Curtis latest btw:

BBC - Adam Curtis Blog: HOW TO KILL A RATIONAL PEASANT

Galula was the star guest and he got up to speak first. To begin with he put forward his fundamental theory.

"Revolutionary warfare requires a revolutionary approach on both sides in the struggle. Whereas in ordinary war the objective is to destroy the enemy and occupy his territory, the guerrilla's aim is to control the population.

This, therefore, must be the aim of the counter-guerrilla as well"

But then Galula put the boot in to the aspiring counter-insurgents. Whether it was due to his disenchantment with what had happened in Algeria is not clear - but Galula laid out the central problem for the counterinsurgents when they tried to mirror the communist revolutionaries - they didn't have a cause:

"One basic difference between insurgency and counterinsurgency is that the insurgent starts out with nothing but a cause and grows to strength, while counterinsurgent often starts with everything but a cause and gradually declines in strength to the point of weakness"

So the RAND corporation decided to find something equivalent to a cause, powerful enough to bring the villagers in SE Asia over to the American side.

But somehow the ideas of the rulers had problems gaining traction, perhaps because they underpinned a system designed to control the very same persons they tried to sell the ideas to.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!