I remember taking a class where the professor claimed the framework above as the basis for understanding interactions between people and their governments. People ultimately have two actions they can take, to use their voice/dissent, or leave the country.
In a world where dissent isn't possible, leaving will be the only response to poor governance. How seriously a government takes emigration will also depend on the people emigrating as a highly skilled engineer is far more valuable to the national economy and military than a fast food cashier, and this would skew political influence away from one person one voice towards one dollar one voice even more. In the event even leaving isn't possible due to an emigration ban, the only response may be to refuse to work on new technologies and let the country stagnate economically until the government is weak enough where dissent/rebellion is possible again.
At the end of the day, power games form the foundation for most large-scale human interactions, and you only have power over someone if you can give them something they want, or do something to them they don't want. Governments want their people to not rebel and overthrow them, and to be economically and technologically productive so they don't fall behind and get conquered. In a world where rebellion isn't possible, not giving governments the economic production they want is the only way to exercise power.
> leaving will be the only response to poor governance
There are an awful lot of people around the world who want to leave their country but can't.
When I visited China ~15 years ago, I met several people who told me they wished they could leave and see where I lived, but they didn't think they would ever be able to.
I remember taking a class where the professor claimed the framework above as the basis for understanding interactions between people and their governments. People ultimately have two actions they can take, to use their voice/dissent, or leave the country.
In a world where dissent isn't possible, leaving will be the only response to poor governance. How seriously a government takes emigration will also depend on the people emigrating as a highly skilled engineer is far more valuable to the national economy and military than a fast food cashier, and this would skew political influence away from one person one voice towards one dollar one voice even more. In the event even leaving isn't possible due to an emigration ban, the only response may be to refuse to work on new technologies and let the country stagnate economically until the government is weak enough where dissent/rebellion is possible again.
At the end of the day, power games form the foundation for most large-scale human interactions, and you only have power over someone if you can give them something they want, or do something to them they don't want. Governments want their people to not rebel and overthrow them, and to be economically and technologically productive so they don't fall behind and get conquered. In a world where rebellion isn't possible, not giving governments the economic production they want is the only way to exercise power.