It is in keeping with the concept that the more aggressive paths portrayed in the game (Autocracy and Fist profiles) have some really good bonuses, but have some downsides farther up their tree to represent the downsides of their extremism (ie Fist gets freaking suicide bombers). Perhaps Autocracy should be dubbed Authoritariansim instead, but in the context of a non feudal society the differences are splitting hairs
Well. First, technically Suicidal Bombers are purely positive trait. In fact - NO OTHER trait is killing your own tanks, APC, walkers and so on.
Second, Autocracy providing no bonuses (and very minor stratagems, aside from faction anti-unrest one). Yes, you will almost always get autocratic option to do with unrest & strikes - but it's costly option too:
1) You need to hold garrison and for large cities a single battalion is not enough for such events.
2) You will suffer some causalities and lose some population.
And no, I would prefer equal approach without any biases in game mechanics, like done in Stellaris. Want to be religious fanatic? Okay. Want to be pacifist? Okay. Want to be a Zerg? Okay! Everything will provide you with some kind of bonus. So you have a freedom to roleplay anything you want and not penalized by game simply for picking "wrong" option on start.
Especially in SE setting. We are already in post-apocalyptic society, lol.