How many times have you heard about the dangers of a dictatorship that takes care of people, provides them with a perfect standard of living, but at the same time deprives them of their freedom. It is one of the most frequent themes among writers and political philosophers, at least since Alexis de Tocqueville. And it sounds logical.
It sounds logical on the face of it. But after thinking about it for a while, one thinks. Wait a minute! Something’s wrong here. How many dictators have there been in history who have provided people with a secure comfortable life in exchange for freedom? Not many. And even the exceptional few lasted only a very short time. Even in the history of various totalitarian regimes, either the standard of living and the tolerance of the regime went up or both went down.
But it is important for understanding not to confuse personal freedom with the right to seek the overthrow of a regime. All regimes naturally resist their overthrow.
The exchange of welfare for freedom is just an interesting literary construction. Real tyrants deprive people of both liberty and prosperity at the same time. And under good rulers, people are better off and more free.
I’m afraid the warning about the exchange (you must not insist on a reasonable standard of living because it would endanger your freedom) is just a propaganda ploy aimed at reducing people to poverty in the first stage and enslaving them in the second stage.