Egypt currently has nearly the opposite of anarchy, it has a military-run state.  Some people are even labeling it a "deep state," arguing that the "deep state" has won.

You did not make the "self-defense against anarchy" argument in your first comment, you made this one, about being able to fight against a tyrannical government:

Second Amendment supporters don't have to trust the government to do the right thing,  they assure for everyone even the wussies, that the government, never takes the governed for granted and the government derives their power by and from the people. Especially considering,  the voting PROCESS becomes corrupted. The government doesn't always protect our Constitution; the people with the ability to protect against tyranny are the true patriots   Carrying signs and occupying squares are useless exercises against a Government bent on abuse.

That argument totally argues the cause of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and that they should use guns as a recourse.

Now, I want you to move on and check out what good having some guns has done for the Muslim Brotherhood. After their fairly elected guy was thrown out, through masses of people representing a majority asking the military to step in and help eject him and his minions, they started Carrying signs and occupying squares and touting that they were going to be peaceful about it. When nothing happened from doing that, they started screaming about being willing to accept martyrdom (i.e., "give me liberty or give me death.") and some of them started to get violent and some started to carry guns. This caused the military to slaughter them and arrest most of their leaders. Meanwhile the majority have started to argue they are terrorists and are happy with what the government did to them. They are decimated; a lot of experts think their organization will shortly be declared illegal. And the majority does not care because they think they are violent terrorists because some of them use weapons.

Your theory about personal guns simply does not have any use in this day and age when all governments have armored personnel carriers and the like and a large military that will obey their orders.

So these days, in the situation of a government you consider "tyrannical," the lesson from Egypt is that guns cannot help you, but they can very much hurt you. What you may want to look into however, a lesson from some other countries, is retaining a "right" to make and use IED's and car bombs?! Those seem at least to have a slightly better effect against a government and its military because they can be used anonymously, do hurt a military's effort, and other people cannot see you using them against the government forces and therefore cannot label you a terrorist. Using guns will just get you and your allies killed or arrested if a military is in charge.