This quote has been floating around on the interwebs recently, attributed to John Rawls:
The bad man desires arbitrary power. What moves the evil man is the love of injustice.
The quote seems to be derived from Rawls’ 1971 book A Theory of Justice. The source text appears to be found on page 439, where Rawls is discussing “moral worth” in light of what he refers to as “the full theory of the good.” An excerpt is provided below so that we can see more of the context. Two lines are bolded, but it is worthwhile to read the entire passage provided:
…we can distinguish between the unjust, the bad, and the evil man. To illustrate, consider the fact that some men strive for excessive power, that is, authority over others which goes beyond what is allowed by the principles of justice and which can be exercised arbitrarily. In each of these cases there is a willingness to do what is wrong and unjust in order to achieve one’s ends. But the unjust man seeks dominion for the sake of aims such as wealth and security which when appropriately limited are legitimate. The bad man desires arbitrary power because he enjoys the sense of mastery which its exercise gives to him and he seeks social acclaim. He too has an inordinate desire for things which when duly circumscribed are good, namely, the esteem of others and the sense of self-command. It is his way of satisfying these ambitions that makes him dangerous. By contrast, the evil man aspires to unjust rule precisely because it violates what independent persons would consent to in an original position of equality, and therefore its possession and display manifest his superiority and affront the self-respect of others. It is this display and affront which is sought after. What moves the evil man is the love of injustice: he delights in the impotence and humiliation of those subject to him and he relishes being recognized by them as the willful author of their degradation. Once the theory of justice is joined to the theory of the good in what I have called the full theory, we can make these and other distinctions. There seems to be no reason to fear that the numerous variations of moral worth cannot be accounted for.
