I think Freddie’s main thesis is incontestible. However, at points I don’t think he fully engages (“steelmans”) the orthodox position he’s trying to push against. For example, in discussing elite colleges, the more sophisticated position that I was waiting for him to argue against is that places like Harvard are elite mostly because of selection bias, but also it is life-changing for students who attend such places because of prestige, network effects, etc. that would give them a better life over and above the benefits they would accrue from their natural talents (i.e., being good enough to get into Harvard in the first place).
I also found the last chapter superfluous and untethered from his main point. I don’t think it helped the book to have a socialism primer at the end of it. The thesis of the book is good enough to stand on its own, and you don’t need to tie it tenously to a greater political project to have its fullest expression.