I wholeheartedly agree with your summery. I was absolutely fascinated by the first part; such a shame, the author wasn't able to apply its point to his own sug

I wholeheartedly agree with your summery. I was absolutely fascinated by the first part; such a shame, the author wasn't able to apply its point to his own suggestion: Whether the law is made by one body or by many -- it will remain an authority, a government made by people, used to impose one set of values to other people, and open to misuse. His blind faith in free markets seems to have clouded his judgment. Counter-examples to his free market for laws are easy to find. Sharia laws in Britain are just one example. Women are hardly 'free enough' to voluntarily accept its authority. What about children: Can they voluntarily accept the authority of a certain court? According to the cases of child indoctrination and abuse by crazy religious parents, priests, and schools, not so much. Markets fail rather often (depending on the definition of failure). Shoes are a perfect example of a free market that somehow 'works', but is inherently inefficient in many regards. One just needs to try to find a shoe that (a) fits, (b) is subjectively good looking, and (c) priced fairly. Now imagine one would additionally need to look for (d) an acceptable court for clearing disputes!