i haven't read it (and maybe i should) but it sounds like that book might be ideologically dogmatic. i get disappointed by such things because they never model

i haven't read it (and maybe i should) but it sounds like that book might be ideologically dogmatic. i get disappointed by such things because they never model sociopolitical life accurately enough for the conclusions to be useful. governments are not special in requiring vigilance to keep them in check. religions, corporations and other large political bodies (in the larger sense of the word) also require vigilance. the answer isn't simply individualism. these political bodies form because they provide social and economic efficiencies that we want. such groups form instinctively and immediately, and as such, we won't stop the formation of political bodies. the question then is how to we structure the collection of political bodies so that they keep each other in check, since no one individual can effectively orchestrate such a balance? democratic capitalism is interesting in that it's an (imperfect) iteration of such a system.