I would take it as Axiomatic that there are some advantages to dictatorship or absolute Monarchy, decisions and reactions are faster, the rules are simpler, (fail to follow them and you die or if you have an enlightened absolute exiled) Generally crime and punishment are more direct (see Saudi Arabia) and if you are one who is favored by the dictator or Monarch you are likely living pretty.
That being the case it doesn’t surprise me to read this article at the Guardian lamenting the death of East Germany:
Of course, unification brought with it the freedom to travel the world and, for some, more material wealth, but it also brought social breakdown, widespread unemployment, blacklisting, a crass materialism and an “elbow society” as well as a demonisation of the country I lived in and helped shape. Despite the advantages, for many it was more a disaster than a celebratory event.
This could have been written by any of our Castro loving left today, and they would justify it any sympathize with it. Just as they said that people were better in Iraq when Saddam was there or how it would be ok to let the Taliban have Afghanistan again.
They make a small currency of freedom since they take it for granted, but lets play a game. Lets say instead this was written by a white south African decrying the end or apartheid or a Plantation owner in 1870.
Our friends on the left would be (rightly) outraged at this idea yet as I look at the memeorandumlink I see a few blogs on the right but no outrage from the left.
Bill Jacobson says it best
What is remarkable about the philosophy of putting economic security over individual liberty is that it is such standard left-wing fare. And it sounds so familiar lately.
Ms. de la Motte should not be so sad. She could have a fine future ahead of her in Washington, D.C
Let me be blunt, this woman is either deluded or evil and I sure hope it is the former. She would press the button in that new movie to get the million bucks and as one of the elites she did. Her comfort was purchased with the lives and blood of her countrymen no differently than the slaves of the south or the oppressed of South Africa.
Learn from her or be prepared to repeat her mistake.
Update: The Anchoress as always finds the right way to put it:
I’m thinking Bruni de la Motte would not have much liked the “asocial” Ulrike Poppe. Possibly Bruni de la Motte would have reported her for not being happy that her life was being so efficiently managed for her.
If she doesn’t write for a living she should.
Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog 
[…] he going to endorse the Della Morte […]
but slavery is different. The slave owners livelihoods were on the line… The slaves were investments…
I don’t think it is different at all. The “Elites” of the communist block only were able to live as Elites because of the aid of the state and the oppression of the people below them. Their rewards were predicated on the oppression of those below them. They were “invested” in the oppression of the state.
As for the slaveholders I always thought they were fools. The Slaveholders could have hired freedmen, they could have paid their workers and as has been amply demonstrated people working freely for their own betterment will work harder than a person subject to the lash. Remember the free states of the north managed to do very well farming without slave labor.
[…] Interesting to note that Vanden huevel of the nation declined to say if she would support the bill in its current form if it comes to a final vote. Maybe we should ask her about the Berlin wall business? […]