Quite true. However, historically speaking, the common people generally preferred distant and centralized government oppression to local oppression.
In English history, for example, the common people mostly supported the king in his various dustups with the nobles. The king and his officials were at least uninvolved in local disputes, whereas for the local nobles they were often intensely personal. Mr. French gives an example of this in his story, with a friend of his badly beaten by cops at a traffic stop for the crime of dating a cop’s ex-girlfriend. Difficult to envision FBI guys with similar local hatreds.
To be sure, historically much of this was because the central power didn’t have mechanisms that would allow them to impose their authority in detail at the local level. Even autocracies like the Tsardom or the Ottoman Empire were of necessity highly decentralized. Though governments like the Tokugawa Shogunate did an amazing job of local control despite these limitations.
This has of course changed. Modern communications allow for intensive surveillance and control.
I understand freeper fears of central despotism. My only point is that local despotism can be very nearly as bad, and is I think much more common. But nobody really cares unless you can slap a racism or “war on women” label on it.
Up close you know exactly why someone is implementing a regulation against having a pit barbecue.