I've read it over a few times again, and think I know why it's so divisive. In the memo, he describes a state of affairs, with two possible subtexts: 1) This

I've read it over a few times again, and think I know why it's so divisive. In the memo, he describes a state of affairs, with two possible subtexts: 1) This is the state of things today, and the uncomfortable truth of how we got here; what do we do about it? 2) This is how things both are and should be; either get in line or leave. I, obviously, gravitated towards the first interpretation and you the second. Without further context, I'm not sure there's any way to really know which was intended.