I think his general argument is that the trends of modern history are not adequately explained by the obvious factors you mention, and that a single hypothesis

I think his general argument is that the trends of modern history are not adequately explained by the obvious factors you mention, and that a single hypothesis that logically explains these effect-behaviour gaps is preferable to lots of ad hoc explanations around each individual trend. With respect to obsession vs perception, he's saying that it only makes sense to pursue more status if you are already high status. Greater status is not attainable for most. If you mistakingly think you are high status, you will accomplish little except wasting your time. Case in point: useless advanced degrees.