Amusing Article... Or is it?

I've just read a peculiar article on DevX: OOP Is Much Better in Theory Than in Practice.

I don't know what to make of it; it's either tongue-in-cheek (it is very funny, perhaps unintentionally so); otherwise, the writer is trying to make a "serious" point; if he is, then he's either lost the plot or has had his head in the sand for the last 10 years.

Some choice quotes:

OOP just introduces an unnecessary layer of complexity to procedure-oriented design.

In my view, confusing OOP with programming is a mistake. OOP is to writing a program what going through airport security is to flying.

A frequent argument for OOP is it helps with code reusability, but one can reuse code without OOP—often by simply copying and pasting.

[On encapsulation:] ...most programming is done by individuals. Hiding code from oneself just seems weird.

I've began to wonder whether OOP is simply the latest fad, like Forth, Pascal, Delphi, and other programming technologies before it. History has seen these "final best solutions" many times, when waves of professors applauded some idea (structuralism, Marxism, existentialism, logical positivism, etc.) only to turn like a school of fish when the next big idea came along.

To be honest, constructing a class often is fun. It's like building a factory that will endlessly turn out robots that efficiently do their jobs, if you get all the details right. You get to play mad scientist, which can be challenging and stimulating.

Nearly three decades ago the Basic language was introduced as a teaching tool—a way to teach programming to college students. Because its primary goal is clarity, Basic employed a diction, punctuation, and syntax that were as similar to English as possible. For a while it was a success, but things took a turn. [i.e. when C / C++ was introduced]

To me, hope resides in the computer itself, not us foolish humans. I expect the machine to eventually be capable of interpreting human instructions in human languages. When that happy day arrives, most OOP dogma will likely seem bizarre, wasteful, and irrational—just one more dead end in our fumbling efforts to
communicate with intelligent machines.

Is he for real, or what?