The purpose of licenses and permits aren't to pay governments for access... the purpose is to prove competency. Lots of permits and licenses don't carry any cost.
You don't get a driver's license by paying the DMV, you have to pass a series of tests.
A gun permit shouldn't be provided to someone who knows how to handle a firearm safely.
Ideally you would want a licensed electrician, plumber, accountant, mechanic, etc to provide their expertise instead of some random who has no experience but is filled with unearned confidence they can do the job for you.
When flying interstate, I'm confident that the people in charge of the 787 are all appropriately licensed. Same if I need surgery.
Licenses aren't a revenue stream, they are the way that people can find an expert they need without needing to do all the background work themselves.
The way to resist governments isn't with firearms - it's with collective action. Physically fighting the entire US military will just end in lots and lots of death. Governments are there to represent you and your wishes, if they're not doing that then the people need to collectively change that. Shooting someone isn't productive, it takes organizing and protesting and getting representatives in that will look after your interests to make actual meaningful change.
There is a whole ecosystem in the United States to keep people divided, to keep people scared... fearful of other groups or anyone different, fearful of the government, fearful of criminals, etc... all to keep people in the US buying more and more weapons and accessories. It's obviously a huge business and extremely profitable, especially since fear also helps get clicks and views too. Keeping people divided is extremely profitable for so many reasons... but the solution to that is for people to unite and work together. A united people is an unstoppable force.
I agree with competency. Why do you believe a government monopoly is the best, or even only, way to train people? You clearly have zero experience with firearm culture in the US, just distorted media representations. What if trade unions offered guarantees for the work of union members instead of outsourcing to governments and insurance corporations? You appeal to the status quo and just assume it is right and proper without any examination.
I am not advocating civil war. I am advocating the same deterrence for the individual against trespassers you believe threat of legal action from government will impose on people who fail to comply. You, however, are advocating for open war against non-criminals because you believe in arbitrary laws enforced by men with guns.
People like you demanding government violence against peaceful people are divisive. However, unity is not inherently proper. Progress always comes through deviation from the norm, and appeals to popularity and consensus are irrational.
If I refuse to obey new laws, but do not violate the life, liberty, or property of others, how am I a criminal, and how is violence against me justified? Just answer that simple question.