The author may be right or may not be, but this blog post is worthless. The author clearly believes something and is using aggressive language and the internet shouting to convince people. There is no evidence, no discussion of nuance, nothing new. I’ve worked at companies that are super libertarian, it’s great in some ways and absolutely terrible in other ways. I’ve worked places that are very structured, same thing. Each of them succeed and fail in different ways. But most importantly: both styles of companies were very successful. Maybe, much like technology choices, it’s really more about your employees being happy.
Well, to be fair, calling it worthless is also coming off a bit strong: it’s not like the author claims factual truth, the subtitle of the blog does say it is about thoughts and ideas. To me that indicates an inclination towards writings as creative works, and less towards factual and objective truths. As I read it, the author makes a point like “if X does not work for you, and you use these arguments because you have this opinion, consider changing your opinion.” So imho you’re barking up the wrong tree.
If I understand your response correctly, you are saying that the subtitle of the blog says it’s about “thoughts and ideas” and despite the language of the post making several assertions about what someone should be doing, we should not interpret it as such? I disagree with this perspective. I believe that if you write something then it should be analyzed based on what one wrote. I’m not even sure how the subtitle makes the content immune from scrutiny. Some thoughts and ideas should have some evidence to support them!