It's a nice idea, but I can't see it ever working in this day and age.
Digital communication in general has a lot of inherent privacy risks. When you add corrupt/biased tech firms like Alphabet, and corrupt/biased institutions like the FBI, the risks quickly begin the exceed the benefits of such a medium.
The right wing has made amazing progress over the past decade; decentralizing has brought real, tangible results. I say that not to discredit the value of teamwork and organizing, but more to stress the idea that, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" kind of philosophy.
Decentralization is good for the right. The left's strength comes from their dogmatic, lockstep unity; the average leftist is not especially smart, or strong, or charismatic - this is usually why they become leftists in the first place.
In contrast, folks on the right tend to be high in competence, but also much more independent, and value-driven.
Beyond the fact that the further we scale down, the weaker leftists become: large right-wing groups are often prone to in-fighting and splintering, largely because we're value-driven, and psychologically independent. Lone wolves and isolated cells, who may share 90% of the same views, could still be divided because they passionately disagree about the remaining 10% of issues. But in creating a smaller, insular cell, you have a natural protection against ideological subversion and in-fighting.
We're gaining ground, and they're losing ground; let's not sacrifice an effective defense for more offense, when both our offense and our defense are doing their jobs effectively.
The Whore of Babylon wasn't built in a day, and it won't fall in a day, either; we need patience - this will be a generational battle (as it has been, since at least the 60's).
Attached: 1551140746201.jpg (1192x670, 21K)
