If you mean "The world sucks" then say that instead of saying "the world is fallen". Fallen has a very specific meaning, and using it as a poetic slush word is enough to make me not take the OP seriously.
Welcome to the magic world of metaphors and symbolism...
If you mean that you don't like the author's choice of words, then that that instead of saying "the entire article [is] essentially meaningless".
> Fallen has a very specific meaning
Which of the four definitions in WordNet, or dozens of other possible dictionary meanings, is that very specific meaning?
> and using it as a poetic slush word is enough to make me not take the OP seriously.
"Slush" has a very specific meaning, involving partially frozen materials. I feel that your use of it here has rendered your entire comment essentially meaningless.
It's the religious implication in the article that invalidates it. Christian belief is that humanity's fall from grace can only be redeemed through the intercession of christ, and the author links the impossibility of any utopian state with that fall from grace, so obviously the only way to resolve it is theological.
The author's implied statement that any attempt to create a utopia must either come from god, or be religious in nature, is the problem. If, like me, you don't believe in god, and believe organised religions are inherently bad, then at that point the author's credibility is destroyed and the article is just another religious rant.
I’d like to know what secular state of grace supposedly existed that we fell from?
In fact, for most of history, and with very great many minds throughout history agreeing to that, it would be your objection that would be considered bizarre.
You don't have to believe in a specific creator or any specific religious mythology to agree with such a statement as "this world is fallen". Even as atheist like e.g. Emil Cioran could agree with such a statement. But even if someone actually believes e.g. in the Christian god, it's almost irrelevant as to the validity of their belief that "this world is fallen".
It's just a way of seeing the world -- as permanently imperfect and with fatal flaws in its construction. In fact most of our history and even personal lives agrees with this observation as well: we are ignorant of most things, we age, we get ill, we suffer, we kill each other, we are petty, and so on. And in the end, we just die, along with everybody we knew and loved. All that in an indifferent universe, that could e.g. wipe thousands of us out tomorrow with an earthquake, a tsunami, and so on. Or something of our own making, like a nuclear war.
These things can be summed up in "this world is fallen", and there's nothing bizarre or unconnected about it.
One might disagree and see progress etc, and even be optimistic that everything will prevail, or even see no issue with death and illness and the ills of old age, and so on. But in the main there's nothing much bizarre in saying that "this world is fallen" -- e.g. that things are incomplete, broken, and more often than not disappointing.