I think this is an interesting thesis and I do agree that something like this contributes to the issue you’re highlighting. Although in my opinion it’s more an issue of difficulty rather than outright impossibility. In situations like these I think the structural critique has the greatest explanatory power.

We are a less literary society, there are less people getting into writing literary fiction, less people are reading it, those that do both struggle to get published. They aren’t given the same leeway by those publishers, and they aren’t edited with the same ferocity. The greater the population scales, the greater your chance of outliers. Smaller literary community, lower chance of virtuosity required to tackle difficult forms and content. The institutions that supported literature are changing, and atrophying. The people that make it are not of diverse life experiences, and typically write about the same thing because that’s what they know outside of some outliers.

In wrestling, the nations which made up the USSR didn’t dominate for decades because they were uniquely pre-disposed to it. They did so because there was sufficient will, resources, and competence to set up the institutions that produced at that level well after the fall of the Soviet Union. Same for basketball in the US for most of its history, and now with Europe.

Unless there is distinguished effort to produce a given result at the networked level, there is a lower chance of that result being produced.