Far as I can tell "just kill him" is
ALWAYS an option no matter what "system" a government operates under!
🙁
Ultimately, what I was getting at that economically empowering a state
lacking in "systemic pathways for change" that countries like the U.K, U.S, etc have(and citizens of those locales take for granted) only serves to make that state more totalitarian and more able to compel compliance. The whole "make the them economically better so then their system changes" was either politicians--many of whom were lawyers who should see such simple bullshit--being blind(imo less likely) or covering up the actual fact that they sold out for $$$ behind closed doors.
There are also systemic protections that allow for activist activities to work in Anglo areas, such as due process, restrictions on detention, right to a lawyer etc. Where as over there, the cops can cook some charges up and just arrest whenever, then detain as long as they want. It happened to Yundi Li, the renowned pianist, and he has expressed loyalty to the regime in the past.
Personally, my maternal family had the experience of "detention" back in the 60s. Not a place you want to be. Kept in a factory for days, every move watched, including when going to bathroom. My mom only had her detention cut short because her health took a turn for the worst and her stomach area ballooned in size.
It is correct that any government can take someone out, but it's often harder work to cover tracks in an Anglo nation if it's a figure who has built up public prominence. Everyone in the clique has to be on board. The "government executive" like the President or state governors can't just order up a public killing because he feels like it.
With a more free press, death can set off a media firestorm or "sanctification". If it's a locale with state-run media, no such fanfare happens.
Without an independent judiciary system, the possibility that a little suit that migrates to highest court in the land and lead to a landmark ruling is eliminated beforehand; these were key in the civil rights movement.
The power of the press is highlighted in guardianship cases. As far needing to acquiesce to public attention, the courts could simply ignore it. But the fear of appearing to lack integrity can release a person from a predatory guardianship/conservatorship if sufficient awareness is whipped up. The Britney Spears case is the most prominent one but my family had to deal with something similar 10 years prior involving my grandmother. When the state has power, it's acts in its own interest always. Mom got a blood test to check on grandmother's CEA, it showed elevated. Then the glorious comes with their hammer barring my mom from any more visits where grandma could leave the nursing home.
arstechnica.com
