BillMryes

To add to what rtpg says, if you look at an actual, monadic example of an IO:

  putStrLn "What is your name?"
    >> getLine >>= 
    \name -> putStrLn ("Hi, " ++ name ++ "!")

It's just a giant chain of instructions, each previous result feeding into the next. Nowhere do we assign anything, modify anything, etc. No mutation.

Even in non-Haskell, a lazy list is a obvious possibility for that. It's not for no reason that many languages have implemented map, reduce, filter; laziness can still be pretty efficient while increasing composability and readability.

Even Java has finally been dragged into the 1960s!

In the computer, you also have no descriptive variable names and make excessive use of gotos. This is far from a good argument.

> Haskell does support mutation, but inside of particular monads.

You are mistaken. Monads do not involve mutation; that would defeat their entire purpose. Although it's true that the monadic code is being compiled into assembly that involves mutation, just as $LANGUAGE code is being compiled into assembly that includes a lot of goto.