I don't see a full-blown revolution happening just on government actions alone. Pockets of civil disobedience, protest marches, and isolated violence/rioting, YES. But a revolution? Nope--that's going to need something in the way of a major catastrophy as a catalyst. The fact is thar 200 years ago, the world was a much different place than it is now. The vast majority of the population has become reliant, if not completely dependant, upon technology and modern conveniences. Actual revolution would collapse nearly everything that most people need as a basic life-support system. Try to imagine cities of hundreds-of-thousands of people trying to survive for just one week if the government did one thing--turned off the electricity. It would be like Katrina ten-fold, but without the flooding. All the government would have to do to win is let things fester for a few weeks, then step in and say "recognize us as your government and we'll make everything right again--the power will come back on, you'll have clean running water again, and life will get back to normal..." Most of those still alive would not only agree completely, but then turn against anyone who truly wanted to fight--no matter what the cause might be or how just its purpose.
Face it--200 years ago the US was populated by people who knew how to live from the land and endure hardships that the majority of the current population couldn't even begin to understand or even imagine, much less enter into by choice. If the lights don't come on when they flip the switch, most people wouldn't know what to do--there won't be any fight without something else starting it first.