Here's my response:
That is true for tens of millions of people of all races. And hundreds of millions of people of all races have a greater chance of success than under any other system. Of course, people of any race who are unintelligent, lazy, unethical, emotionally unstable, and/or or not resilient will have a low probability of success, especially in today's tough job market that is toughened by global competition, and because of a wealth of policies that redistribute dollars and human resources away from the job creators.
And yes, in a socialist system, such people would no doubt benefit, because they'd get an equal share of resources, no matter their productivity, their merit, but that brings with it huge liabilities to the overall society because of that very redistribution: the aforementioned reallocation of resources from those most likely to abet society through innovation, leadership, and job creation, to those with the least. And of course there's the demotivating effect of paying people the same whether they're productive or not. The liabilities of that became clear, for example, in the endless Soviet bread lines. But we have a short memory.
So I have only have a minor disagreement with the author's statement, "America has institutional inequities built into its structures that guarantee that millions of Blacks have no chance at success." I would replace "no chance" with "little chance."
But far more important, for the statement to be placed in the necessary context, I would add, "But other institutional structures, such as the more socialist one the author advocates, are likely to cause far greater net harm to the nation's people.