Since the two books are the flip sides of each other, it is difficult to see how you can do this.
Both books are dystopias about the gathering and wielding of absolute power over the peoples of the world. In Nineteen Eighty-four, it is essentially the application of brute power and seizing of resources. Human psychology is manipulated into frenzies of rage and society is atomized by a climate of fear and mutual suspicion. O'Brien tells us the future is a boot stamping on a human face, forever.
Brave New World uses a more subtle approach, taking the resources of the world and metering them out in such a fashion to distract and pacify the population, so the "Alpha's" can essentially have free reign. Rather than being whipped up by two minute hates and the endless war against Eurasia/EastAsia, people are distracted by a constant search for sex, consumer goods and mind altering drugs.
The point of both of these books, besides telling us tyranny works best by preventing people from cooperating and being forced or incentivized to only look for the moment, is that the control of the environment by the political class is the route to gaining and maintaining power for good or ill.
The second part of your question is how would a small group of people rebel against this environment? The short answer is they cannot. However looking at the real world, we may see there is some hope anyway. The buckling of the current Western political "consensus" (for lack of a better term) is driven by the huge changes in demographics, technology, communications and so on that have happened since at lest the 1960's. The political, social and media structures developed and refined since that time no longer have the answers to the questions of the day, nor the ability to control the "Narrative" the ruling classes want us to follow. The result between the mismatch between the "Narrative" and the observable reality around people is things like the Brexit, the rise of the AfD, Front National and other nationalist parties in Europe and the election of President Donald Trump on a populist platform which had little to do with the preferred "Narrative" of the political, bureaucratic, academic or media classes in the United States.
So either the accumulation of incremental changes or a single large change (like the Lisbon Earthquake of 1775 or the Great Crash of 1929) that upsets or openly contradicts the prevailing world view should be sufficient to cause some people to start openly questioning the systems that surround them and wonder why they failed or what alternatives might be available to the existing order. And of those that wonder, some will be driven to act.....