It's quite interesting to appreciate that these issues were observed, and written about, some 2400 years ago. Times when ostensibly everything would have been practically alien. Yet it emphasizes that the thing that's really changing is not humanity, so much as it is technology. We're still trying, and failing, to deal with the exact same issues as we were thousands of years ago.
And mind you that's just the first time it was written down. I wouldn't doubt that these observations and issues long predate even Plato. Because I think one thing that's become clear is that he wasn't necessarily unimaginably brilliant so much as he was simply capable of objectively seeing the patterns in society and recording them. Though perhaps that is some form of brilliance in its own right.
The reason the article resonated with me is because policies and interventions are often sold as "this thing is self-evidently great, and if you oppose it you're an idiot", rather than "this seems promising, so let's give it a try and scale it up if it works well". When I look at proposed measures at my local government level (for example) almost all of the supporting literature focuses on why the problem is important, rather than why the proposed interventions are likely to succeed. Being "effective" as a legislator means enacting policy, so if you want to be effective you try to keep the conversation on the first part.