From American Thinker:
On the surface, a goal of improvement is a good one. Who can argue that making something or someone better is a bad thing? Isn’t better better?
But in government, it frequently isn’t. All too often, “improving society” involves changes that result in dehumanizing society. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao all were motivated by the desire to create a perfect society. They saw powerful government as the way to fix the problems in human society.
Of course such efforts have never, ever worked — simply because “utopia” is contrary to human nature.
The Greeks invented democracy to solve the problems that big, strong governments created. Humans have tried many forms of government, and few people with a historical perspective deny that America, operating under a system of laws (a republic) with a democratically elected and limited government, is the most successful design yet.
The more liberal-minded people always claim that society could always be even better if the government would just make a few changes. The conservative view is that more government is not the answer to societies’ woes.
But we humans never seem to leave well enough alone. When they have the best they can get, people always think there must be some way to make it even better. Striving for more, for improvement, is a human virtue, but this virtue is misdirected when it comes to empowering a government that wants to change things in the name of improvement, without really considering the results beforehand. The law of unexpected consequences comes to mind — nothing ever turns out as you expect it to.