I agree that society could be expected to defend itself and its myths. And if we're talking about deranged anarchists or visionaries who mean to destroy society and replace it with something untested, it would be hard to consider those radicals heroic in any sense.

I don't have a fully worked out plan of how society should be that differs from how secular liberal society already is. I appreciate the freedom of speech, regardless of its downside. Of course, like all inspired artists, I criticize anything that seems to me flawed. But what I think you're picking up on is a certain wistfulness for an unarticulated alternative. Nietzsche probably had that nostalgia or yearning too. It's a question of not feeling at home in your time and place, or of alienation as a consequence of philosophical reflection.

It's not a matter of hiding something, though. I'm open to exploring ideas of how capitalism, for instance, might or should evolve. Mainly what I say is that we shouldn't expect radical changes in society. Capitalism and democracy were supposed to be such changes, but we see the same sociological cycles playing out in those modern terms, such as drastic inequality between an elite minority and a duped majority. Rather than secretly resenting the fact that my social vision isn't being tried out, I'd say that those in the know and who pride themselves on their integrity should content themselves with flourishing in some subculture, at best. Philosophy and great art aren't likely fit for the majority since politics gets in the way of handling such large numbers.