Lewis was one of the great writers of the 20th century. I've read many of his books, fiction and non-fiction, and all are remarkable. The point he is making here is that he would rather live under a Robber Baron that just wants his money, who doesn't pretend to be doing it for his own good, than moralizing busybodies who dictate what food he can eat, what means of transportation he can use, what kind of light bulbs are available.... (you get the idea!) and takes his money, too--all the while claiming they do it for his own good. He's not saying one is good and the other bad; he is negatively comparing his target against someone that everyone knows is bad to expose those who cloak themselves in claims of doing good. The good he wants is to be left alone and to determine his own behavior according to his own understanding of morality. Most of you get it, but it seems some people don't understand this kind of soft tyranny. Read Jonah Goldberg: tyranny can come with a smile as well as a scowl. And, by the way, totalitarianism often starts this way. Dictators usually just build on the soft tyranny of their predecessors--they just do it bigger!