For me, I think Friedman's whole point boils down to opportunity. Freedom-whether economic or political--exists when all have the same opportunities. The success that is the product of people making use of said opportunities is circumstantial and unique to each individual, but for the most part, as long as those who are able to participate in society (mad men and children excluded) are all equipped with access to involvement in government and societal affairs, I think Friedman would appreciate that kind of society, a democracy.
The only way to secure this right for people is to make sure lines are clear so as to discourage infringement upon, or hindrance of, one person's success is to minimize majorities and the likelihood of them forming.
Overall, I agree that a limited government is ideal. I think in our society today, the fight against majorities and intimidating groups should be paid more attention to.