You're fighting tooth and nail for that shot at a better life and that's admirable. But I think the author has different aspirations. Those ideas of "changing the world" are perhaps born out of the privilege of at the very least getting to call a first world country their home, but I think they're still worth discussing - though any changes proposed must not close doors to people like you.
With all due respect, while I know that you didn't mean to come across as such, some may find those comments a bit patronizing. My "fighting tooth and nail" isn't complete when I went from a 3rd World existence to a 1st World existence. I'm very much here to win "in the big leagues". Without trying to sound too much like a Bond villain, I too am seeking to change the world in ways that I think are meaningful, without giving a damn what others think. I too have aspirations of being at the top of the world and molding it into the way that I think that it should be. I find the ideas of people who approach the world with this discontentment, which seems sophomoric to me instead of insightful, to be rather milquetoast. The elite are disillusioned because they're comfy. They convince themselves that they need to derive more meaning and get caught up in the performative nature of their life which is directly a result of their privilege. Most people who actually do change the world, at least in a capitalistic manner, bring an edge and killer instinct, often refusing to accept that they're not the best, or even if they aren't that they are required to act differently in accordance. This whole story came across to me as someone who folded at the first sign of any self-inflected psychological query. Much of the rest of the world would kill to get to Harvard, whether for the pure reasons of seeking knowledge at the world's most renowned college, or to play the game of life to get ahead.
I want to also bring up one more observation that addresses the psychological aspect that the author addressed when he said elite colleges close doors psychologically, by describing manual work as beneath them. I've gotten to know some people who come from the world of the elites, and I've found it farcical and disturbing how often people do performative bullshit like send their kids to work construction jobs in the summers before college to learn about things like "the meaning of hard work". If I was to send my hypothetical children to work in construction, it'd be to learn construction with the view of deriving real world capitalistic value from it, not as some performative mind-body exercise.
John Adams, one of the Founding Fathers, said:
"I must study politics and war, that our sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. Our sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history and naval architecture, navigation, commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry and porcelain."
This quote illustrates to me perfectly why wealth is typically destroyed in 3 generations, or at least why that stereotype exists. The rigor and knowledge disappears as the elites become more concerned with the optics of what they are doing, instead of the actual work at hand. It's precisely why I brought up my lens of being an immigrant. My future kids will probably never have the hunger and edge with which I work, but I hope to distill in them rigor, and hope that they can bring that intensity that I still lack today.
