You really do sound like some 18th century yokel coming to London for the first time and remarking: "Boy that Wren chap certainly hasn't designed anything "interesting" in the past fifty or so years."
Though I've grown a bit fatigued by aA's recent propensity for seemingly conventional designs, I do enjoy their clean simplicity and attention to detail. I also appreciate that they are exploring variations of a theme, thereby creating a unique architectural style. And I can say that it is a unique style because, without any foreknowledge, I can easily distinguish their work from that of the less refined pretenders. That can be said of only a small handful of firms in this city.
That being said, I think you would gain a lot more traction during these aA-debates if you focussed on substantive arguments rather than the supposed intellectual inferiority of anybody who disagrees with you, and I wish you would gain more traction because I tend to agree with your positions. It's clear that you know your architecture, but architecture is art, and art is ultimately valued subjectively. You don't have a monopoly on determining what is beautiful.