Hmm ... what you say, seems for me not be so different from the stance you profess to be fighting. It would be to question or check whether your statement that an indirect path has not brought you further is really true in dimension?
The personalities recognised by history who supported people or formed a support network usually did so in secret, out of necessity, that if they positioned themselves too publicly, they had no safe place to offer to those seeking help, as they were on the radar.

Who determines what is the "necessary change"? "The world" is a truly big word ... to assume "denial" for your fellow human beings is to go very far out on a limb.

You do not know the condition of the many with whom you have no personal contact and have known them for a certain period of your life. All the others are anonymous and you cannot presume that they are stupid and unconscious. Most importantly, you will not get someone on your side by accusing them of inaction or unconsciousness, even if it is true. ... In my experience, the willingness to see one's own errors does not take place in the keel of the fight and the accusations made, but rather in the letting go of opposing views, namely through non-focusing. This does not mean that one remains inactive.

People are able to read between the lines and grasp the unsaid. This ability, I think, is often underestimated. An indirect way of granting each other freedom, what would that look like for you?

Whereas for me personally, I would see your choice of public as the more difficult path, I would not ask you to choose a different way. Everyone chooses for themselves. That is what I seek to respect.