Okay, so he's not a Brit bashing Brit.
I take that back.
But he sets up a paper tiger: "bullies" taking other men's wives and wheat "has always been the way" of things, and so people have to be made to feel good about being ruled. Whereas the historical record may vindicate his claim in a general way, this only tells us that rulers have historically abused their authority. He refuses to consider that there may actually be something legitimate called "authority". If one took his arguments to their natural conclusions, and accepted them, one would have to be an anarchist and consider democracy only the next step in the governmental evolution of humanity.
What tripe.