Governing by the Consent of the Governed

I'm not sure why dictators even try. Nearly all of them are ousted within a generation or two, sometimes three, often loosing their lives and their families' lives in the process.

Just look at what's happening in Libya.

"Opposition groups formed "popular committees" to maintain some sort of order after pushing out government forces in a spreading revolt against longtime strongman Moammar Gadhafi, who has led the north African country since 1969."

"...a large part of the army has joined the anti-government forces..."

And here: "Libyan pilots defected to Malta."

Our Founding Fathers knew these cold, hard facts from the get-go, but the royal crown apparrently, did not. It was a tough lesson for Britain to learn, and ultimately they were tossed out of most of their conquered kingdoms.

It doesn't matter whether "We, The People" are Americans, Indians (below China), Tunisians, Egyptians, Libyans, Iranians, etc. When a government stops realizing they're in power only because those they govern allow it, they start down the heinous road of "I know better than you"-isms which ultimately lead to the people saying "enough is enough."

A smart government never allows itself to forget that. When a government has either forgotten that lesson, or is too forgetful, stupid, arrogant, or prideful to admit it's true, they're quickly shown the door, if not the gallows.

All in all, the smart governments are taking notes on what's happening on the Middle Eastern front. I sincerely hope the United States is one of them.

The will of the people will not always out.

Some tyrannies survive their tyrant (e.g. communist China and Cuba among many others). Some tyrannies are toppled and replaced with others (e.g. the Russian and Iranian revolutions among many others). When the people have had enough, no government can stop them, so it can be argued that all governments--including tyrannical ones--have some level of consent, however small, of the governed. Revolutions happen when, in the course of human events, a people are willing to suffer the consequences of throwing off the current tyranny.

Some caveats, though:

1. A tyranny is easier to remove, and there will be fewer consequences of that removal, if the people have not been disarmed by that tyranny.

2. If the people have been disarmed by a tyranny, they are still powerful enough to remove that tyranny. It will be much harder, and the people will suffer tremendously more in the process of removal. Therefore, the tyrannical situation will have to get much more dire for the people to believe that the political change will be well worth the tremendous suffering