It’s the eternal question of freedom vs safety. You could argue that nothing is bad about Viltrumite rule, assuming you don’t think free will and personal freedom is more important than societal security and safety. The more fascist and less personally free you make a given society, the more safe and protected that society becomes. But, the tradeoff means individuality and person freedom stops being valued. Individuals no longer get to decide for themselves how they live their life or what they do in their free time: they get structured into a society where obeying authority is the most important virtue of all.

It’s like the gun control debate: would you prefer a society where people don’t have the personal freedom to own and operate firearms as they see fit, at the exchange or fewer shootings and less gun-related deaths per year? Or a society in which individuals have the right to own and operate firearms as much as they personally decide they want, at the cost of society having more shootings and gun-related deaths per year.

There’s no right answer. Both perspectives have a valid point, because both sides are valuing different qualities. One side values safety and security over personal freedom, the other values individual decision making and freedom over safety.

It’s up to you to decide for yourself what you think is more desirable for society to strive towards. But, keep in mind, under a benevolent fascist ruler, you don’t get the choice to decide for yourself what you think is better. Only one side of the debate allows everyone to think and choose freely for themselves what they want from society. The other simply tells you, and you either accept it or die.