Thanks for your thoughts, @builderofcastle
I agree with you, that some revolutionaries of the past were effective and their methods did have an impact. It was useful to talk with people and spread ideas. I think what I am exploring here is, like you say, the reality of our modern predicament: One where the media and the state (arguably parts of the same institution: big business) conspire to so effectively crush revolutionaries when they appear in the form of singular, charismatic leaders, that this method of enacting change is almost suicidal.
I personally can't think of a single revolutionary having an impact on the world via the media at the moment. Edward Snowden comes to mind, but he is almost invisible in the mainstream media. Nor was it possible for him to stage his revolution without facing instant imprisonment by the state he was trying to enlighten. At least Gandhi was free to walk around a bit and talk to people about his ideas.
It may be that the struggles of today, especially in the west, appear not to be existential: There is not, for example, a food shortage, and state violence is largely covert: enacted through oppressive taxation without representation, and poor working conditions, police brutality towards non-white settlers. Climate change is mostly invisible to the masses (for now). The things we have a shortage of: compassion; community; connections; equality; I feel must be constructed through new ideas, distributed electronically, and sustained by building new systems to supersede the corrupt ones. And I feel these new systems are best built quietly, out of sight of the oppressor, without too much obvious leadership.
I suppose I feel, in myself, the temptation to become a public spokesperson for a certain perspective, but I feel like doing so leaves me open to unnecessary attack, and distracts from the underlying task: To build a better world.
Thanks for provoking more thoughts :)