Yes, I came to the comments intending to say that. I agree with the author that talking about 9/11 that way just makes him look crazy, but he should not in any

Yes, I came to the comments intending to say that. I agree with the author that talking about 9/11 that way just makes him look crazy, but he should not in any way cut down on his free software rhetoric because of "practical" considerations. An activist like him is selling two things: his ideas, and a call to action. If he restricted himself to giving "practical" recommendations, he would no longer be selling his ideas; he might get some people to switch to using free software, but they wouldn't be part of the "movement"; they'd switch back to proprietary software as soon as their job or some particular task required it, and then he'd be left with nothing. Whereas if he argues for his ideas, and takes them to their logical conclusion, he will convince a few people (many, if he's lucky) that will likely become members for life (if not necessarily active members) and can build a real community that has a chance of growing and eventually achieving total success. Now, it might help to give people some things they can realistically do right now. But the life of a movement lies in its radical members, and "practicality" should not come at the expense of the promotion of the (radical) ideas. Cf. the abolitionist movement, the civil rights movement.