Vonnegut was brilliant, but I never found his writing subtle. He generally was pretty straightforward about things. imho, Harrison Bergeron should be taken at face value as his indictment against holding back the gifted among us.

Remember that his exemplars aren't great Randian industrialists, but like... dancers. Artists. Quietly intelligent men like himself. Vonnegut isn't saying "the strong should triumph and stand on the backs of their lessers and dominate the world" but rather just "let great and beautiful things be great and beautiful".

And there's the subtle misogyny that our hero is smart and his wife is a bit dense and happily accepts their dystopia. I love Vonnegut, but that fits with his writing through and through. Vonnegut's women generally... aren't great.

Yes, letting greatness be victorious has kind of a conservative bent because it also implies letting the losers lose, which runs runs against progressive ideals that Vonnegut seems to hold of making sure everyone is taken care of. I think Vonnegut was the kind of man who could hold both those thoughts in his head at the same time.

We contain multitudes.

In general, it's a cute story within Vonnegut's body of work, but anybody who fixates on this one piece... it's kind of a red flag of "I would do great and awesome things if only the bleeding heart liberals stopped holding me back!"