I don't believe that the capacity for violence in the citizen populace will have any deterrent effect on the continuing growth of government abuses on said citizenry. It didn't stop a civil war, Japanese internment (although it did deter foreign invasion), end Jim Crow, or prevent Waco, Ruby Ridge, or Katrina gun confiscation. So Anonymous asked me why I ain't leading fighters in rebellion against our legitimately elected government that he claims is completely illegitimate. He also claims that the conditions for success don't mean squat and that luck is the deciding factor, which is pretty much lazy thinking at best and pure agitprop at worst.
If 150 or so million gun owners haven't been able to curtail the growth of the police state up until now then it would be foolish to expect that trend to suddenly change. Everyone seems to think that the deer hunters in Wisconsin or Pennsylvania equal the military might of some other countries Army. Yeah right, hunting and killing are two very different activities. Even if you buy into the three percent ideology you are looking at 4.5 million gun owners actually willing to fight. But how many of them vote?
How many of those 150 million gun owners voted for Obama? Whenever someone goes the full Godwin and compares a politician to Hitler I like to point out that none of our politicians has been anywhere near as successful at the polls as Hitler. 98% of the vote is pretty impressive, even in a national socialist fascist regime.
Only recently have we seen Republicans lose their primary because of their stance on guns or taxes. That is a trend I would like to see continue. I'd also like to see the continued pressure of the TEA Party on matters of fiscal importance. As much as the left would like to paint the TEA Party as nothing but religious fundamental nutjobs even the Flying Spaghetti Monster himself can't change the math of an unbalanced balance sheet.
All across the world Muslim men convince themselves of the righteousness of their cause and go forth to kill and die in allah's name, to claim their heavenly reward of pure sex slaves to pleasure them for eternity. They happen to be fighting for an evil ideology, but they really believe it.
I don't believe that democracy can ever be the basis of a stable, prosperous, and free society. We got ourselves to where we are by our local, state, and national popularity contests. Logic says that we can't keep doing the same thing and expect a different result.
So what would success look like at the end of a "restoration of liberty"? Would it be a Republic where we disenfranchise everyone under 55 years old who doesn't own real estate? Would we be better off going back to the indirect election of Senators, with confirmed term limits on the office? We sure as hell can't restore the Constitution as written, 3/5th's rule and all. Remember those 4 conditions for a successful insurgency? Having a shadow government ready to take the reigns? You need that or you fall into the "perpetual revolution" that happened to the French as people fight over what the end state should be by killing off folks with a rival viewpoint of "success".
I'm a soldier, and a pretty cynical one at that. What I am not is a political scientist who understands how to set up a government that is both effective and limited. Effective governments have few limits, and limited governments (as the Articles of Confederation showed) are not effective. Think about it, before you can convince people of the righteousness of your cause, sell them a vision of a better future, you have to have some sort of holy book that justifies their sacrifice. From the Koran to "Das Kapital" or Mein Kampf to the Federalist Papers every conflict worth studying has had some promise of a better tomorrow.
I've heard a lot of theories on "when it will be time to fight" from Dutchman6's "study the revolution" (which I think is overly simplistic, you don't win the next war by studying the last war) to "lines in the sand" to "no more free Waco's" and understand the folks are justifiably angry. But angry without a plan is pretty useless. Anger motivates people less than hope does (Obama's hope and change slogan was pure genius, but since his revolution slowed down it seems he's going for anger and class warfare this election season). Bottom line, you gotta have a plan that people can believe in and agree on. If you don't have that, the revolution will fail.