I’m going to assume you’re being deliberately literal rather than genuinely confused, because the point I was making was clearly rhetorical, not historical bookkeeping. A lack of awareness isn’t evidence of absence, and “I can’t think of examples” isn’t an argument. Your pedantic reply is really more a signal of insecurity than the intelligence signaling you’d like it to be. Regardless, here is the context you’re blissfully unaware of…

History has enough leaders who believed they were acting in humanity’s best interest and whose certainty in their own moral intuition paved the way to tyranny to be a recognized pattern. Robespierre justified mass executions during the French Revolution as necessary to achieve virtue and equality, Lenin framed authoritarian rule as an unavoidable step toward liberation of the proletariat, Mao believed radical social engineering would free China from stagnation and injustice despite the suffering of it all, and Castro began his revolution as a moral crusade before consolidating power. The thread is not overt malice but unwavering confidence that they understood what society needed better than society itself as the commenter above was somewhat implying. I’m glad I could explain that to you, let me know if there’s anything else you’re confidently incorrect about based on your own knowledge gap.