When the "paragon" expresses contempt toward people of the past just because they didn't grow up with the same ideology and therefore have different priorities, and has a myopic view that "everyone" has a wonderful life because of "Federation principles"... he's no paragon. Jean-Luc Picard lives in his own blissful little bubble and never imagines that life could be imperfect.I prefer Jean-Luc Picard. I don't think there's anything at all wrong with having paragons in fiction: heaven knows we have so few in real life. I was an adolescent when TNG was on, and I really admired Captain Picard. He had a formative effect on my sense of morality: respect for all life, the pursuit if peace and cooperation, his respect for individual autonomy, and so on.
That bubble was poked somewhat with the Borg, but it took much longer for him to open his eyes to how regular people lived on some planets (ie. Bajorans). It seemed to take forever for him to understand that his blissful little bubble isn't shared by all of the people outside of Starfleet, and that money and profit really does exist (ie. Ezri Tegan's family owns a mining business and are very much concerned with money).
Picard was willing to use the Prime Directive to let innocent people die. Kirk would not have been. And while that led to reviving Khan, Kirk would also not have hesitated to allow McCoy to revive the three 20th-century people.