edit: the Aztec empire is an example for this. The religion was politically enforced and thus the political system became part of the religion.
So the question is, isn't religion a case that refutes the parent's hypothessis.
one of the central problems of organizations is control/coordination, and religion (through normalizing and centralizing beliefs) provides a very convenient avenue for that (especially because the locus of power is perceived to be beyond any given tribal member). force can be used for control but that's adversarial (also limits size, and therefore power), and a cognizant leader eventually realizes its easier to have the people control themselves than always exert force on them (something most children eventually learn, at least subconsciously, during play).
politics isn't necessarily negative by the way--it's simply a part of the bargain when people aggregate into larger bodies and need to coordinate. it's also a relatively recent innovation that we try to separate government from religion, the intertwining of which had been a long-established norm across cultures.