This idea that surveillance and centralization[0] are mainly dangerous in a dictatorship is quite harmful, and I've heard shallow dismissals based on this, along the lines of "we would have bigger problems then". To be fair, these arguments were originally from well-meaning advocacy, and these tendencies would make a classic coup d'etat easier, when you want to take full control of key places and paralyze any opposition.

But the main consequences of central control are universal to any political system. Law enforcement and organizations in general are corrupt everywhere to varying degrees. You're probably more likely to be harassed because some random employee doesn't like you (or "likes" you too much), for a random reason, and not because of some large political intrigue. Consider this in a system with no recourse and accountability, and where you cannot know that you are targeted or why (see getting explanations for bans from banks or internet corporations).

For example, currently payment processors seem to have a reputation for being pro-consumer. I'd be interested in how this persists long term in a truly cashless society.

[0] I came to avoid the word 'privacy' for basic rights discussions, because it also seems to facilitate trivialization.