>The rest of your points make sense but I don't understand fully how this is an argument for monoliths? Isn't recovery from an unknown state an equally hard problem in both cases?
He's not saying that monolithic kernels make recovery easier in this case. He's saying that microkernels don't make these failures easier to recover from in practice, so you may as well take the performance gains that you will get from the monolithic kernel instead of giving up those gains for theoretical recoverability advantages that you won't actually usually see in practice.
The rest of your points make sense but I don't understand fully how this is an argument for monoliths? Isn't recovery from an unknown state an equally hard problem in both cases?