In the end, the criticisms of Schweitzer's article on Modern Orthodoxy have boiled down to one of two things:
1) No mention of Rav Joseph B Soloveitchik and his important role in the development of Modern Orthodoxy in North America
2) It seems the article is recommending that Modern Orthodoxy become Chareidi.
I'll leave the first point aside for now. The second, however, is important because those who make this criticism seem to have missed the point of the article.
What, exactly is the difference between Modern Orthodoxy and Chareidism? On a fundamental level, it's a difference between autonomy and centralization. The Chareidi world, through its use of a hierarchical power structure and tools of conformity such as uniform clothing and cultural normals, is very centralized. One cannot simply call oneself Chareidi without dressing and acting in a certain way and acknowledging certain concepts as absolute truth.
On the other hand, Modern Orthodoxy has, until now, functioned in a diametically opposite way. Without any central authority, any leader of a congregation or yeshivah has been able to develop his own philosophy vis a vis what Modern Orthodoxy means. As a result, one has a spectrum of practice and philosophy ranging from Rav Avi Weiss and his YCT on the left which is little different than the UTJ, the extreme right end of Conservatism, and Rav Hershel Schachter and his school of thought on the right which is quite close to the left end of the Chareidi world. Interestingly, both sides claim to be following in the spirit and philosophy of the Rav Joseph B. Soloveitchik despite the wide variance between them.
What this means is that there is no real Modern Orthodoxy in terms of concrete values and beliefs. The movement is simply one that occupies the position on the spectrum from UTJ on one side to those Chareidim who wear coloured shirts during the week on the the other. This is hardly an inspiring model for its youth which is why the majority, when they hit university age, either drop out or buy a black hat.
If Modern Orthodoxy wishes to become a real movement rather than a space filler, then it must create concrete standards that define what its beliefs and positions are. The problem is that whatever the standards, someone is going to disagree with it. Allow women's prayer groups and the right wing objects. Disallow them and the left wing shouts "foul". Until now this fear has kept any meaningful change from occuring. But the atrophy of the movement is accelerating. The recent capitulation of the RCA to the Chareidi-controlled Rabbanut is a sign of this. Imagine if the RCA had wanted to hold its ground against the Rabbanut. Could Rav Basil Herring have resisted Rav Amar knowing that his membership's support is, at best, lukewarm? One cannot lead when the followers will not follow. One can also not blame the Chareidim for this power play. They realize their opponents, the Modern Orthodox leadership such that it is, is weak and have taken advantage of it. The MO crowd may be smarting from this realization but for the Chareidim, this was a can't-miss opportunity to impose uniform standards, their standards, on anyone claiming to be Torah observant. This won't be the last time the Chareidim invade the Modern Orthodox community and demand it change its standards or be delegitimized. And if the MO response is the same each time - whining about how their weak leadership surrendered and how they shouldn't be fanatics - then the Chareidim will win each confrontation.
It's also not as if the Modern Orthodox community hasn't produced its own outstanding leaders. Men such as Ravs Hershel Schacter, Michael J. Broyde, Benjamin Hecht and Yehudah Herzl Henkin among many others have been hard at work expanding the depth and scope of Modern Orthodox halachic thought. The literature, the responsa and the philosophy are all there but need to become the authoritative guides to the Modern Orthodox community.
The only way to break this is for the Modern Orthodox community to acknowledge that it has a problem of self-definition and loyalty. Faced with a united front to the right, it must form a united front of its own and it can't do that by trying to be all things to all people. Somewhere along the line, Modern Orthodoxy will have to define itself along halachic lines and then say to those beyond those boundaries: You're either in with us or you're out but you can't do whatever you want and use the MO label any longer. I don't not write these words easily. Disenfranchising Jews whose hearts direct them towards God and his Torah in ways I disagree with is not my intent but the alternative will lead to a complete disintegration of the centre ground and no place will remain for those who wish to be observant but do not want to be Chareidi.
Once this is done, those who remain in the MO fold must become passionate about their beliefs. No long "frum by default", their Orthodoxy must be a positively expressed one, the same way the Charedi community passionately expresses their way of life. In this regard, Schweitzer iws 100% correct. Only by seeing themselves as a cohesive movement, by knowing that others think as they do and are prepared to fight for those same beliefs, can the Modern Orthodox community exert its influence in Jewish affairs.
The Modern Orthodox world has to pull back and develop some insight instead of reflexively rejecting anything that seems Chareidi. In some areas, such as ascribing importance to Torah learning, the Chareidi approach is quite legitimate. In other areas, such as the disdain for productive work and the disregard for kavod habriyos when it comes to non-conformists, the Chareidi model is not workable. But to develop a new MO model requires an open mind and an ability to decide that one's principles might not be the best ones from a Torah point of view. It means accepting that certain stringencies, far from being inventions of fanatic rabbis or not reflective of Jewish trends in that past, are real behaviours that are incumbent on all Jews who wish to show fealty to God and His Torah.