Firstly, I completely agree that there should be no sacred cows and Tolkien can be criticized as much as any author. (Ah! You see, I didn't mean what I said on the topic title.)

That said, Paul Smith's real point seems to be about the way "fans" react to anti-Tolkien criticism. He points to the thread on MJH in Westeros, as well as your post about Borges on Tolkien. He fails to read the umpteen threads where Tolkien is criticized, and no one is crying murder.

Case in point, there's a thread on "Black and White vs. shades of Grey", which talks about morality in fantasy. Tolkien has come in for some sharp criticism there, while others have shown appreciation for his work.

What's the difference between the reaction to these criticisms and the anger with which most boards have reacted to the essays of Richard Morgan, MJH, Moorcock, etc.?

The answer is fairly easy. Just look at the titles of these essays:

Richard Morgan: The Real Fantastic Stuff.

Micheal Moorcock: Epic Pooh.

M. John Harrison: The clomping foot of nerdism.

These authors have not only criticized Tolkien's work (Which they have a perfect right to do), but done so in a way that is bound to cause a reaction. There's this sense of bitterness that comes through, and they go way beyond just raising objective points against the novels.

Look at Richard Morgan:

Well, I guess it’s called fantasy for a reason.
I only wonder why on earth anyone (adult) would want to read something like that.
And I’ve written a fantasy novel for all those adults who wouldn’t.
Hope you like it.

What is a reader to glean from this? What's the point of insulting the taste of people who read and enjoy Tolkien? What's the point of discussing world-building in fantasy in tones of abject horror and making doomsday predictions?

I've seen time and again that merely disliking Tolkien is not enough. Many a high-profile critic will go the extra step, go on a rampage, try to rip the novel to shreds.

To me, these histrionics seem designed to inflame arguments. Surely these guys know that writing in those terms is bound to attract the attention of knee-jerk Tolkien apologists? Why not stick to the point?

Since they fail to do so, I've never felt there's any need to defend them. I suspect they're getting exactly what they wanted in these long threads on various discussion boards.

EDIT: Which brings us back to the title of my post. I'm taking a leaf from their book.