Does living under an authoritarian government increase aversion to state intervention in the economy and social affairs? This is the question I tried to answer in my research, which I had the opportunity to present at the Free University of Bolzano.

---

Last week I had the opportunity to present at the Bolzano Applied Microeconomics Workshop, a two-day event packed with insightful discussions and engaging debates. Held in the stunning Free University of Bozen-Bolzano in Italy, the workshop brought together researchers from various institutions to explore a diverse range of topics, including the role of propaganda in triggering subversive movements during Fascism, the cultural spillovers of 19th-century migrants in the USA and their influence on the rise of the labor movement, as well as the growing demand for policies to protect society from the advancements in AI technology.

In this setting, I had the pleasure of presenting my own paper: “Authoritarian Rule and Preferences for Governmental Intervention.” My research explored how experiences of authoritarian regimes shape citizens’ attitudes toward government intervention. Specifically, whether individuals who have lived under such regimes tend to favor stronger state involvement in economic and social affairs, even after democratization.

I use East Germany (the German Democratic Republic, or GDR) as a case study. Established after World War II, the GDR operated as a single-party communist state, exerting extensive control over economic and social life. In theory, prolonged exposure to the regime could have led people to accept the pervasiveness of state intervention. However, the government also relied heavily on repression, particularly through its infamous secret police known as the Stasi. This raises a key question: did government repression reinforce support for state intervention through fear, or did it foster resentment and opposition?

Using survey data to assess people’s preferences regarding the role of the state, along with historical administrative records on Stasi presence in East Germany as a measure of repression, I empirically demonstrate that individuals who lived longer in areas with higher levels of repression are significantly less likely to support government intervention than those who spent the same amount of time in regions with lower repression. While repression might be more intense in areas with higher levels of dissent, I exploit the organizational structure of the Stasi to compare regions that were exposed to different levels of repression quasi-randomly. My findings suggests that while exposure to totalitarianism shapes political beliefs, the intensity of repression plays a crucial role in determining whether individuals internalize or reject state activity.

This workshop was a stimulating and rewarding experience. I left Bolzano not only with fresh insights to refine my research but also with exposure to many great ideas from colleagues. I’m excited for the opportunities ahead and already looking forward to the next workshop, where I’ll bring along my next projects!