> This article is written in what's becoming a new modern 'style' in which the author doesn't say much of anything at all, but makes references, references, and allusions to modern shibboleths and meta-idioms.

Your comment is written in what's becoming a new modern 'style' in which the author rejects the notion that there can be anything smart besides what they're familiar with, and assumes that if they don't get it, then there must be nothing there to get—so anybody who claims to have gotten something from it must therefore be following some cargo cult.