Steven den Beste, in “An act of faith”, puts words in the mouth of an anonymous blogger:
. . . I, myself, do not admit to holding those opinions to those around me because I’m afraid of the consequences. But I believe that American voters should do what I say, not what I do, and they should publicly embrace the opinions that I myself fear to admit to in my own name.
They should be courageous and take chances based on my writings, even though I’m not willing to. They should risk social censure, even though I do not.
I haven’t read the blog in question, so I won’t comment on it in specific; but —you knew a ‘but’ was coming, didn’t you?— but it seems to me not unreasonable to say: “Here are some things I wish someone would do, and I hope to persuade you that they are good ideas. I am unwilling or unable to do them myself; but maybe my constraints do not apply to you. Maybe you can see a way to do whatever-it-is without the same risk that holds me back.”
Maybe only an underachiever would think of that.
It’s odd to re-read this shortly after learning that SdB suffers from a hereditary degenerative condition.