I didn't find the article interesting at all. In addition to being naked propaganda the content itself was insight free as it's just a couple of anecdotes about moderately successful people moving to a new city.
Defense of the status quo is ideology too.
To see the information portrayed in the article as normal and good is a political position, just like seeing it as bad is a political position.
But even if pro-business pragmatism weren't an ideological alignment, politics isn't some dirty thing that innately sullies everything and should be avoided.
> politics isn't some dirty thing that innately sullies everything and should be avoided.
I strongly disagree with this statement.
If you see politics — not being a politician or partisanship, which have different implications — as inherently bad, you are not seeing politics for what it is; you are seeing politics as some evil process, run by a cabal or by a mob, and your position as inherently logical and reasoned.
This is a bad idea even if you have a good reason to believe you're right. Rumsfeld's "unknown unknowns" are part of why this is a problem.
Let me add a weird metaphor: you are saying smell is something that only comes from perfume, rotten organic matter and certain chemical products. You may not perceive the toned-down smell of things you are surrounded by, like wood, plastics or the air in your office.
Now, why I say that this article is political (and unjust imo) is because that very personal and logical decision is being placed by someone else into the realm of politics.
I definitely missed the 'attacking' portion of the article.