The wording comes across as dogmatic; yet the article isn't actually dogmatic - it sincerely acknowledges cases where the functional approach isn't suitable (even including the really cool algorithm of quicksort - BTW you might mention games as another one where mutable state is convenient). Showing respect for alternatives (where due) makes an article seem objective, impartial, intellectual and truth-seeking (rather than pushing an agenda; or trying to sell something). It would probably be beneficial if the wording reflected your intent.

I did find it distracting, because (to be frank) people don't like to be told what they should be doing; laughter is a way to defuse the affront. Another approach is to appeal to those (few) people who are keen to learn about techniques that will help them. And I really think that that's what you were going for. Changing the wording would help achieve that aim, in my opinion.

So... yes.

btw: I really liked your explanation of linked lists being cheap to modify; and the article in general is very well done and communicates very effectively - I'd say it's of textbook standard.