I am of the opinion that any effective resistance against an oppressive takeover will not be military opposition, nor will it be violent. The problems of the future will not be solved by force of arms but by the radical actions of neighbors helping neighbors.

I think that one of the huge problems of the modernist approach is that it supposes that the only levels are the individuals and the state. Family and community are seen as things to liberate people from. In the end, though, self-employment, family, and community are the ties that if we take care of them, they create the best options for the survival of a free state.

> Watching common Americans being abused by their government and corporations for a decade now, with very little that came out of it, except a few protests / shows / petitions - I highly doubt a serious uprising is possible.

I think you're watching the wrong people.

> Right now, most people, especially young (what's saddening), are conformists and as long as they feel relatively safe and well fed, they won't go far than writing a comment on HN... like this one :)

This has always been the case - it's human nature. It was true in 1775, it was true in the 60's and it's true today. It's the minority who stand up that change the world.

In the 60's, many protestors were directly threatened by being drafted to go to Vietnam... so their motivations were much more vivid and literally life-threatening. What's going on today is arguably more threatening to our financial system and world ecology, but as you said, we're in general pretty comfortable and not as motivated as back then.

If our government threatened to limit sales of alcohol (as in Turkey), among other extremely conservative laws, that would probably create a big reaction and protesting.