>>15
You're arguing against Scheme, not against new Lisps.
Racket made it even worse: instead of dealing with plain symbols, you're dealing with these syntax values (called “identifiers” in this case) that are essentially a symbol and some opaque information that represents the lexical scope for its source. In several syntax-case systems this is the only difference from defmacro macros, but
in the Racket case this applies to everything — identifiers, numbers, other immediate constants, and even function applications, etc — they are all wrapped.