Yes, your examples are well chosen; my comment was inspired by them b/c it got me thinking of a different, related example. I asked myself,
"Were the people running away, or were they also taking political action? For if I recall correctly, in Poland and Czechoslovakia under the Soviet Union, there was the Anti-political Movement where people resisted authoritarianism by disengaging from politics and instead trying to eke out a meaningful existence in private life, religion and community, despite the Communist oppression. That was an 'escape' in a sense, - had all the appearance of escape. But the attitude was not of escapism b/c whilst actively eschewing politicization, the 'resistance' (if it can still be termed such) nevertheless continued to be political b/c it was a turning of backs to the political system."
With socialism and communism it is always a game of resistance, because they are self-destructive systems, and that by wanting to take charge of everything they collapse under their own weight. Sooner or later the system collapses, the question always is; How long are you willing to endure? and, Is it possible to advance his collapse by a coup de grace?
Usually the answer is reduced to resist, because if a country chose socialism by itself, it is possible that its population is too weak to carry out a rebellion, and if the country did not choose socialism on its own, then very probably the country that imposed it would take care of avoiding any problem.
In Hungary there was a revolution in 1956, and its success was great, managing to overthrow the government, however, after the Soviet intervention everything returned to the control of the handful of communist Hungarians who ruled the country. Thousands of Hungarians died.
So if, at one point, the simple fact of continuing to live in an apolitical way is resistance, because socialism is ephemeral. Sometimes voting with your feet is a good option, but as long as you have where to go, the Germans had it, the Chinese had it, the Koreans had it, not so with many other peoples. Otherwise, vote with your actions.
Then, you're talking about dissidents, correct? - dissidents who when in their country civilly fight their government but when disempowered at home 'escape' abroad in the knowledge they can continue to fight from there. 'Escape' is still an issue in my mind.
Firstly, an ordinary man isn't in the position to be capable of fighting from abroad or 'escaping' abroad.
More importantly, the man who can and does, should ask himself whether he 'escapes' abroad becoming a dissident b/c he cannot serve his cause best by remaining in his country and bearing the burden of the fight there, and so he ought to leave; or b/c he prefers to flee to the more pleasant life found abroad.
The fact of fleeing, requires first the fact of belonging somewhere, because you can't flee if you don't belong somewhere first. I will explain myself. If a house that is not yours begins to burn, and you leave, it is not flee, since you do not belong there, on the contrary, if your house is burned, and your family is there in the fire and you leave, then you are fleeing, because you are not doing anything to prevent your house from getting damaged.
So the answer is simple, if you leave the place you belong by external imposition, then you are fleeing, and it is unworthy, because you are leaving your family and your friends in pain. If on the contrary you go from a place to which you do not belong, then you are not fleeing, because you simply do not belong there. Having answered that, it should be noted that there is no honorable escape, that is, you can not leave the country and make an external struggle, the national problems must always resolve within the border of the nation, without foreign intervention.
In the examples I put, people never left their country, because North Korea and South Korea are not two countries; East Germany and West Germany are not two countries; and China, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao are not four countries. All these are one country, but they have two or more States, so the people who move from one place to another are not leaving their country at any time.
Help me understand you. You propose that if a person, say, with a Chinese passport feels so unhappy about the politics of his country as not to belong in his country though wants to belong, he may state this politically by becoming a resident of Hong Kong or Macao or a citizen of Taiwan?
Yes.