I don’t want to go into oppression aspect of his argument, bc I think he is slightly oversimplifying , but I totally agree on a point that everything that is produced by society in a given point of history, also in terms of esthetic value, is a representation of society’s spirit. Also he uses this term postmodern architecture - not good - bc it literally can mean everything and therefore means nothing specifically. Ppl usually use term postmodern when they don’t know how to precisely define an object of art produced after 1950’s . Intuitively I know what type of modern architecture he is referring to , but 20-21 centuries produced a lot of amazing arch objects -this is just an undeniable fact. But altogether he brings up an important topic. Ugliness or lack of exposure to beauty in every aspect of our everyday life is not just an unfortunate circumstance , it corrupts and brings down human spirit. Beauty (understanding of harmony and proportions in everything) should be a default feature not an accidental and optional side effect.