One could interpret the title that way, but not consistently with the rest of the article, which includes assertions like "in the realm of societies, governments and economies, systems thinking becomes a liability".

I think there's plenty to agree with in the article's descriptions of failure and hubris. What the critical commenters are taking issue with is that the article blames those symptoms on a straw man. It's a persuasive article, not a historical review, so it's reasonable to debate its conclusion and reasoning as well as its supporting evidence.