Political repression is obvious not ideal - political openness and free expression are objectively preferred over limiting political expression. But… this is the ideal. The practical reality is that, in times of war every country represses political expression. In the US, UK, and France, for example… in WWI or WWII, what happened to you if you spoke out against the war? Spoke in solidarity with workers in the “enemy” country? What if you expressed that you wanted your country to capitulate to the German Empire/Third Reich?

And make no mistake, for the entirety of the existence of the DDR, it was in a state of war. The capitalist west poured as many resources into toppling socialism in the east as they would a real shooting war. Allowing complete free expression would have opened the door to complete manipulation by the west. To do otherwise would be to betray the very workers - the great majority of the people - who built the DDR. You’re in a workers state and the state is entrusted with the protection of those workers. Anyone who is acting in a way that betrays those workers should be dealt with. Political repression isn’t great but as you saw what happened in the 90s in the former DDR, the workers suffered immeasurably from “losing” the Cold War.

There is very strong relationship between how much political expression a government allows and the level of existential threat that same government faces. In the US or Germany today, sure you can express your politics all you want. Because any form of political expression poses ZERO threat to the powers that be. If we were ever in a situation where in the US, the left posed a real threat, I guarantee you all our free speech protections would go out the window. By the way, in the free, capitalist Germany of today, what would happen to you if you went into the town square and openly expressed solidarity with Hamas - an organization which poses zero threat to Germany or Germans?

And to another point… I am more familiar with USSR than the DDR, but I think it’s fair to say the former was more repressive of speech. And the reality is that, at least after Stalin, in the USSR you could fit the number of people jailed for political crimes in any given year into one-half of a basketball court (that’s in a country orders of magnitude larger than the DDR). That’s for several reasons, but a big one is that the USSR had a policy of prophylaxis. First off, if you were just complaining about your representative or if you were a capitalism enjoyer, you were generally left alone. You actually had to do enough to get on the radar. And if it got to that point, someone would approach you and tell you to knock it off, or there would be consequences. And lots of people who were brought to trial weren’t convicted because they weren’t a big enough threat, and plenty more similarly had convictions overturned. The point of all this is to say, in much of the Eastern Bloc, it took quite a bit to actually get in jail for political expression. If you’re at the point where you are in jail, there’s likely a long road that brought you there. So when you say “my grandfather was jailed for speaking out against the government”, I am going to apply a hefty dose of skepticism that he was just expressing his displeasure to friends at the local cafe or whatever.