There are actually quite a few analogies to real life in Banks's work. The Culture often feels like an exaggerated USA in its interactions with other nations, its constant behind-the-scenes meddling and aggressive cultural imperialism, a trait especially noticeable in Phlebas and Look To Windward.
It's quite plausible that this is an intentional thing here.
What's precedent ever done for us?
The Culture is a post-scarcity libertarian anarchist socirty - that ironically acts a bit like the Borg.
I think Banks intended it to be an example as to what kind of a society would actually work over the distances involved. Any structured form of government would start to feel the strain once it expanded so far.. esp. if they adopted an 'All roads lead to Rome' approach.
?? Zero G Spot seems to be a nartifact at the bottom of the edit page. Only example I can think of is some seabourne nookie. Maybe they're referring to the Cultures' bizarre alien genital tinkering.
Crazy-Prepared seems to fit whoever designed the Changers. They can alter their retinal pattern, although with difficulty.
Idirans = 20th century Moslems?
They started out as peaceful scholars, but then where invaded by some other kind of alien, which made the Idirans turn warlike. They xenocided the original invading species, then went on to try to conquer the entire galaxy (to create order, and presumably peace). Horza speculates that they'll turn back to peaceful scholars evenually, i.e. the warlike thing is just a phase; it'll end.
Horza's main point is that the Idirans won't stay as they presently are, forever, i.e. warlike, whereas The Culture will. The Culture won't change. It'll keep being The Culture, furthering its (perhaps not too clear) agenda, on the surrounding galaxy. Interfering (e.g. "Player of Games"). Treating machines as if they can think.
But, the backstory of the Idirans seems somewhat analogous of Islam on our planet, with the Moslems (after an initial phase of conquering lots of land in the first century or two after Mohamad's death) being peaceful and having a golden age of scholarship, but then (in the late 10th century) some nasty foreigners came crusading and ruined it, causing a profound cultural change. (Emphasizing different aspects of the religion compared to earlier.)
Except for all the differences between Moslem and Idirans, of course.
Still, Banks doesn't usually employ analogies at all. The genocidal dictator in "Excession" isn't Hitler. He's just a genocidal dictator. Same with the nasty dictator early in "Use of Weapons". Are the Idirans one of very few exceptions to this trend of Banks', or perhaps the only exception? Or am I being mislead by Banks' choice of preface quote?
If Banks was an analogy-happy kind of writer, I'd (find and) add an appropriate trope, about this, without hesitation. But he isn't.
Hide / Show Replies