Decentralised system enhance privacy by distribution of data and empowering the users control or even preventing unauthorised surveillance like the definition said, if you want more you are likely a criminal.
A big percentage of today's world population (at least half!) live in dictatorships or authoritarian countries. In these countries, it is "criminal" to do anything the government dislikes, even if there's no harm for anybody but the ruling class.
How don't you know your country won't evolve into this eventually? The last editions of the
Democracy Index are really depressing. Even Russia was "sort of" a democracy about 25 years ago, now it's a totalitarian, nationalist nightmare. Populism of different colours is advancing even in Europe, and populism can lead into authoritarianism.
This is the main use case for "enhanced privacy" I see as of today. And that's why I will always be advocating in favour of mixers and privacy-enhancing services. While I would like these services to become progressively replaced by CoinJoins and similar decentralized mechanisms, these techniques are still quite difficult to use. And not every opposition sympathisant in Russia, China, Venezuela or wherever is an IT specialist.
I want Bitcoin ideally to be as private as cash. It isn't, even with mixers you leave more traces. But it is necessary that these techniques exist. Otherwise it would be able for every authoritarian government to censor their citizens' financial activity (if they happen to use Bitcoin).
I also think that your sentence that more privacy would put lifes into risk is highly exaggerating the problem. Murder and crime rates are decreasing in most countries of the world, even with cryptocurrencies, including even "more privacy friendly" ones like Monero becoming more popular.