True, and we don't really have as much to worry about from the formal military, but the defacto occupation army made of up state and local level law enforcement, the true Praetorians, then that's something to worry about, except they also are denied access to the serious firepower.
In my area, the FBI does have defacto control over some multirole jet fighters, a full squadron of F15s to be exact, since a lot of the Air Force reservists are also in the FBI, but as long as their main focus remains chasing criminals who have money, we don't have to worry about that particular problem.
This is also where the public sympathy angle and public relations gets important, because whether it is Saddam, or OBL, or Farrakhan's people or us, there are plenty of warnings ahead of time and plenty of opportunity to play various diplomatic angles. My take on this is the Internet and satellite access will prevent another Waco or Ruby Ridge - as long as that access guarantees contact with armed and pissed off skilled people who can hit the siege from the outside or crowd in to join the cause, as was done at the Bundy Ranch.
The most relevant thing to observe on that right now is the situation in Eastern Ukraine, which is separating out along ethnic lines. That's with those subtle differences between Ukrainians and Russians, not like white vs nonwhite. If we address reality on this, 20 years from now, lets be realistic, we know how the demographic will work on this. The wild card on it however is the Hispanics. Right now the fastest growing demographic on both sides of the gun issue in California. The main demographic in the illicit arms trade, and the growing demographic in the law enforcement side, although I would be ashamed to say, but have to admit, the pictures I see of the cops kicking doors and confiscating guns are mostly white males, with Asians often calling the shots (like Iggy Chin who I think might have retired recently). I noticed mostly white faces on the BATF raid at Ares Armor too, even a guy who was a dead ringer lookalike for HossUSMC.
In Mexico though, those peasant militias in the southern regions have declared autonomous zones. Directly challenging corrupt local officials, but denying hostility to the central government. I think that's the way to go, which is why I try pretty hard to shut down the anti-Obama (or any president) rhetoric on sites I moderate. It benefits not at all to attack the presidency when we can't even run a single state, or even defacto state.
If an autonomous zone does not develop, or fails in some way, or is under a more expected heavy attack, then sure evacuate. You only really lose the infrastructure there if it actually gets hit, and then you are talking about heavily armed people rolling back and forth in convoy groups at odd hours to new undisclosed locations. If the place is not hit, reoccupied or burned to the ground, you simply go back and reoccupy it a year or so later.
That's where things can work for Kerodin's concept, but the real important thing on that also becomes the question of how we can help everyone make a living who does not already get a government check, and not rattle swords so hard that they start cutting off the government checks for those whose past service or social security contributions rate it. That's where the not quite declared defacto autonomous zones count for something. Really for that, imagine how much you accomplish, functionally, with a gated community.
Sure someone could in theory crash the gate, then you have the association dues, stuff people don't want to pay, but this whole thing requires that participatory citizenship, not a bunch of selfish loners who just want to tag along.
