government v peasants

I must admit that I found trying to read this article rather tedious. Whether it be because all of those acronyms were annoying or I just flat out didnt understand the article... At any rate, I found the discussion of the article to be fascinating. Seriously. There is a lot that can be learned from this article.
It is interesting to me that the peasants have only recently come under study. And I think that many good points were brought up as to why this was the case. But their importance in deceptive. Yes, these may be "only peasants" as opposed to workers who kept the cities running. Plus workers rebelling in a worker oriented state would seem to be much more telling than mere farmers. This of the PR nightmare! The state would be a laughingstock! However if one sits down and thinks for a moment, farmer discontent is an excellent marker of a regimes success. After all, how the agriculture sector of the economy is doing is an indicator of how the economy is doing as a whole.
It never fails to amaze me just how, pardon me, idiotic some people can be. I mean seriously, I am not joking. I do not understand why someone thought that he was just so smart and important that though he had absolutely NO knowledge of farming, that he would make rules regarding how that sector should run (quotas, LPGs...etc). Actually, it wasn't even just one person but a whole GROUP of men. What on earth!? How are these men in leadership positions? How can you be so arrogant and to believe you know everything? This arrogance is their greatest weakness and that is clear to see in this revolt by the peasants. They knew that the demands on them were absurd and ridiculous to maintain. Hence the uprising.