This may be true of spoken language, which humans develop naturally and as a matter of instinct. But it is manifestly not true of the written language, and suggesting that your inability (or unwillingness) to correctly capitalise and punctuate simple sentences is not a form of rebellion against those who would control you.
Forms of control exercised through control of expression are, of course, very real. And were I subject to any of them I could imagine that they would also be very effective. But having grammar rules that aim to ease written expression and comprehension is not a form of control in this sense.
The rules are arbitrary, up to a point, and they evolve over time too. But they don't evolve very fast, unlike spoken language, and it is because of this that I am still able to pick up a book written a hundred years ago and read it without too much trouble. And in any case, the article you link to is not a screed aimed at dismantling grammar, rather it suggests that while grammatical rules do exist, they are not as described in the Elements of Style.