Totalitarian Legacy

Is there a peculiarity about democratically-questionable governments that raises the propensity for transit investment?

I'm no advocate of 'dictatorships'. But since Chavez came to power, Venezuela has seen the construction of three new light-rail systems, and a huge reinvestment in the national rail network for both freight and passengers. I'd argue that these moves vindicate some wrongs — the investments made domestically today will linger longer than policy points.

Iran has four metros under construction as we speak (so they say) and an extensive system in Tehran built since the Ayatollah came to power. We all know China, so of course transit development should come as no surprise. But how many in the western would consider transit a symbol of pride for a city?

I can imagine using this point against transit — that in the Western World, we have cars and don't need "cattle class" transportation. I suppose it comes down to a matter of preference. Cars will still be around after these regimes are gone.

But the infrastructure will remain, and nobody loses out when that's the case. It's one positive legacy each of these regimes will leave.