Why Do Authoritarian Regimes Allow Citizens to Voice Opinions Publicly?

Abstract

Why would an authoritarian regime allow citizens to voice opinions publicly if the exchange of information among citizens spurs social instability as has been often alleged? We show that an authoritarian regime can strengthen its rule by allowing citizens to communicate with one another publicly. From the government’s perspective, such communication serves two interrelated functions. First, if public communication reveals a shared feeling of dissatisfaction toward the government among citizens, the government will detect the danger and improve policies accordingly. Second, public communication disorganizes citizens if they find themselves split over policies. We show that the government allows public communication if and only if it perceives sufficient preference heterogeneity among citizens. The model also illustrates that public communication can serve as a commitment device ensuring government responsiveness when it faces high dissatisfaction, which in turn makes the government better off than with private polling.