I'd be really interested in what their editor sent back for corrections and clarifications, and then settled on this from it.
This was how a whole bunch of cultural studies people actually talked at the turn of the millenium. I had some exposure to stuff like this in an experimental education program back in high school, and I think that exposure innoculated me against it.
It reminds me a bit of the plot of Snowcrash, where someone discovers a linguistic structure based on ancient texts that effectively reframes and overwrites your understanding and beliefs about the world, then a cult leader who lives on an aircraft carrier uses it to inject their minds with a virus that turns people into "zombies."
The basic structure of this text is similar, where it does callouts to concepts and metaphors that the reader can't reason competently about (like Kolmolgorov complexity), and by stacking these unresolved ideas as open loops in the readers mind, it creates a kind of mesmerized submission. If you force a student to sit and read this stuff, they will believe whatever you conclude with that relieves the exhausting dissonance they need to sustain to get through it all. Articles like this are the mind virus, imo.
Humor is the only antidote, and perhaps our only hope.
