To make it clear that it has to be really, really Worth It. Not just sort of "worth it", or "probably worth it", etc., etc. You have to be really, really sure that it's Worth It.
> The language is, in general, difficult and abstracted where it doesn't need to be.
I think what the author is doing is defining technical terms--those are the Capitalized Things. They are to be treated as having a particular meaning in the context of the article, which the author doesn't spell out but which can be built up from context. They're technical terms because they either don't have a well-defined meaning in ordinary usage (like Get Got) or have a meaning in ordinary usage that might not be emphatic enough (like Worth It). The point is to get you to think very carefully about what those terms really mean. Which is part of thinking carefully about the underlying issue the article describes.
To make it clear that it has to be really, really Worth It. Not just sort of "worth it", or "probably worth it", etc., etc. You have to be really, really sure that it's Worth It.
> The language is, in general, difficult and abstracted where it doesn't need to be.
I think what the author is doing is defining technical terms--those are the Capitalized Things. They are to be treated as having a particular meaning in the context of the article, which the author doesn't spell out but which can be built up from context. They're technical terms because they either don't have a well-defined meaning in ordinary usage (like Get Got) or have a meaning in ordinary usage that might not be emphatic enough (like Worth It). The point is to get you to think very carefully about what those terms really mean. Which is part of thinking carefully about the underlying issue the article describes.