Not in the last instance, no, it can't, you are right, but it can severely alter the shape of the slope of the curve of decreasing marginal returns to the already decreasing marginal turns (a meta-curve) to oil production.
As for conditions leading to revolution, this depends on what precedes them. In the book Catastrophism (http://www.amazon.com/Catastrophism-Apocalyptic-Politics-Collapse-Rebirth/dp/160486589X), the authors argue that "the people will revolt when things are bad enough" argument does not hold up to snuff and that, in fact, workers start to revolt the more that they get rights, higher wages and protections. In fact, this is why some argue the stagflation and then neoliberal/financial revolution happened in the first rate, to heel workers and figure out a way to depress worker wages, increase productivity and create new markets, thus forestalling the falling rate of profit.
The instances where there is different, such as the USSR and China were preceded by international and civil war, wherein a vanguard seized the reins of the moment. The only time a revolution occurred because of deteriorating conditions and then succeeded was Cuba and that may have to do with, among other things, Guevera's Maoist theory of performative revolution.
I think, the real way to provoke revolution would be, before stagflation and crisis, to increase the standards of living of all workers everywhere by as many reformist band aids as possible, such that they grow more accustomed to higher expectatons, at home and abroad, and then, bam, when stagflation hits, especially if its responded to with war, workers will understand the complete artificiality of their immiseration and then we may have a revolution.