Well he did not attack the whole brahmin community per-se, but said some brahmin.
I, for one, endorse his line of thought. I (or he) may be wrong, but what I could understand from his post, I will try to elaborate:
1. Even though Chanakya was a brahmin himself, he wasn't biased & endorsed equality of all section of the society. Equality was prevelant during his time amongst all section.
2. But due to growing ambitions of some brahmin later on, some section (or cast) were started to be labelled as lower cast and some (read brahmins) as upper cast.
Now my inputs:
1. Brahmins weren't supposed to be by birth, but by their knowledge of the Vedas. But by making it (being brahmin) a birth right, our social fabric started to loose its strength. That is why, our internal cohessiveness suffered and later on outside invaders could overcome our resistence time and time again.
2. At present day India, all these cast system needs to be abolished as soon as possible. It should not be so hard to criticise ourselves. We now need only two casts, those who have enough & those who does not.
Anyways, feel free to point my mistakes. I'm open to learn new things.