Alan Kay is a proponent for the notion of pervasive use of objects that work by sending and receiving messages, which leads to things like Smalltalk famously having no "if" statements. The attitude is pretty similar to the one that Lisp folks have. It's possible that Hertzfeld had a different takeaway than what Kay meant, but it's not clear.

In case it wasn't clear, Smalltalk does have if statements. They just aren't special keywords like in most other languages; instead, they are methods of the True/False classes.

The way it is implemented (hopefully) opens up the mind to how OO actually can work, but in practise, when you use if-else in Smalltalk, it's pretty much the same as in other languages.

I think a lot of the bullet points in that summary can be sussed from reading Kay's own Early History of Smalltalk: http://worrydream.com/EarlyHistoryOfSmalltalk/

I think the idea was that the OS, programming language, etc should all meld into a cohesive UI that would range from mouse manipulations for the simplest messages to keyboard input for finer communication (and whatever other hardware we come up with later), and a gradual learning curve that everyone (including kids) could mature along.

Some aspects of this are elaborated in "Design principles behind Smalltalk": https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans/cs655/readings/smalltalk....

People shouldn't need to learn a language and its paradigms to tell a computer what to do.

I suspect that the idea is that you shouldn't need a programming language to interact with a computer. I think that fits with the other comment about the computer becoming part of the environment.