The Nature of Evil - Can You Spot the Difference?

The man on the left was a democratically-elected socialist vegetarian environmentalist. The man on the right is a democratically-elected socialist environmentalist, though I'm unsure as to whether he's a vegetarian. Oh, and he doesn't have a moustache anymore, though he used to have one - which seems to be a common indicator amongst wannabe demagogues until they realise how much it makes them look like the man on the left.

But this set me to thinking; what is the nature of evil? I suppose from a libertarian point of view it is the relishment and taking of unwanted power over the lives and property of others. The man on the left had this in spades. The man on the right has it too. His latest pronouncement that he will make London go green, apparently against its will, has all the classic hallmarks of the socialist dictator in the making. This relishment of making people obey your will, against their own, is, to me personally, the unmistakeable brand of the nature of evil, an ever-living force which will probably be with us forever in one form or another. How did the people of London ever vote this creep in? I suppose Ludwig von Mises et al were asking this exact same question in central Europe, after the democratic rise to power of Herr Hitler in 1933. So perhaps this answers my original question. Perhaps the nature of evil is the practice of democracy, where the majority can legitimately tyrannize the minority? It would certainly seem democracy and evil do have a tendency to go together, as evidenced by the two democratically-elected socialist environmentalists above.

(Godwin's Law? What's Godwin's Law?)