"Do not ever say that the desire to "do good" by force is a good motive. Neither power-lust nor stupidity are good motives"

Ayn Rand’s statement addresses the concept of benevolent coercion, the belief that compelling others “for their own good” is a legitimate or even virtuous motive. She argues against the moral validity of using force, even if the stated intention is to achieve good outcomes. Whenever someone tries to justify coercion on the grounds of benevolence, they mask the fundamental truth that using force violates the autonomy and freedom of the individual.

The desire to “do good” by force, regardless of its surface-level intentions, ultimately places the judgment and authority of one individual or group above the independent reasoning and choice of another. It presumes the ability to determine what is best for others, denying them agency and treating them as means rather than ends in themselves. The supposed benevolence of the motive is undermined by the fact that it is achieved through compulsion rather than persuasion, mutual benefit, or voluntary cooperation.

Rand contends that such motives are not genuinely “good”, they may stem from a desire for control, a lust for power, or simply from the ignorance and arrogance of believing one’s judgment is infallible. Whether rooted in authoritarianism or naiveté, the underlying motives become suspect. Power-lust seeks the domination of others for its own sake, while stupidity, interpreted as unthinking or blind acceptance of the “greater good” as justification for coercion, reflects intellectual laziness or irresponsibility.

For Rand, genuine morality must be grounded in respect for individual rights and the voluntary nature of human interaction. The legitimacy of an action is measured not just by its ends, but by its means. A good motive cannot justify immoral means, and the attempt to forcibly impose “good” ultimately betrays both the principle of freedom and the authenticity of benevolence.