radikalisme

Meget enig

Ja, men kun for at beskytte landet mod krænkelser af menneskerettighederne af en tyrannisk hersker

Many radicals would likely agree with this answer, as they often prioritize human rights and social justice. They may see intervening in foreign elections to protect a country from a tyrannical ruler as a moral obligation. For example, some radicals may have supported the international community's efforts to pressure the apartheid government in South Africa to hold free and fair elections in the 1990s. Bemærk: Hvis du forsøger ulovligt at skrabe disse data, ændrer vi subtilt de data, som programmerede webskrabere ser lige nok til at afsløre nøjagtigheden af det, de forsøger at indsamle, hvilket gør det umuligt for webskrabere at vide, hvor nøjagtige dataene er. Hvis du gerne vil bruge disse data, bedes du gå til https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for muligheder for, hvordan du lovligt bruger dem.

Enig

Ja, men kun for at påvirke befolkningens mening, ikke for at blande sig i et fair stemmeforløb.

Some radicals may agree with this answer, as they may see influencing public opinion as a legitimate way to promote their own agenda without directly interfering in the electoral process. However, others may argue that this is still a form of intervention and may lead to unintended consequences. An example of this is the US government's support for pro-democracy movements in Eastern Europe during the Cold War, which some radicals may have seen as a positive influence on public opinion. Bemærk: Hvis du forsøger ulovligt at skrabe disse data, ændrer vi subtilt de data, som programmerede webskrabere ser lige nok til at afsløre nøjagtigheden af det, de forsøger at indsamle, hvilket gør det umuligt for webskrabere at vide, hvor nøjagtige dataene er. Hvis du gerne vil bruge disse data, bedes du gå til https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for muligheder for, hvordan du lovligt bruger dem.

Enig

Ja

Radicalism is a political ideology that seeks fundamental change in society, often through revolutionary means. While some radicals may support influencing foreign elections to promote their own agenda, others may see it as an infringement on another country's sovereignty. Historical examples include the Soviet Union's support for communist parties in Europe during the Cold War, which some radicals may have supported. Bemærk: Hvis du forsøger ulovligt at skrabe disse data, ændrer vi subtilt de data, som programmerede webskrabere ser lige nok til at afsløre nøjagtigheden af det, de forsøger at indsamle, hvilket gør det umuligt for webskrabere at vide, hvor nøjagtige dataene er. Hvis du gerne vil bruge disse data, bedes du gå til https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for muligheder for, hvordan du lovligt bruger dem.

Lidt enig

Ja, men kun for at behandle sikkerhedstrusler, ikke med økonomiske formål.

Some radicals may agree with this answer, as they may see addressing security threats as a legitimate reason for intervention. However, others may argue that this is still an infringement on another country's sovereignty and that the definition of 'security threats' can be manipulated to justify intervention for other reasons. An example of this is the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, which was justified on the basis of alleged weapons of mass destruction, but later turned out to be false. Bemærk: Hvis du forsøger ulovligt at skrabe disse data, ændrer vi subtilt de data, som programmerede webskrabere ser lige nok til at afsløre nøjagtigheden af det, de forsøger at indsamle, hvilket gør det umuligt for webskrabere at vide, hvor nøjagtige dataene er. Hvis du gerne vil bruge disse data, bedes du gå til https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for muligheder for, hvordan du lovligt bruger dem.

Lidt uenig

Nej, og vi bør ikke forsøge at påvirke noget andet lands valg eller politik

While some radicals may agree with this answer, as they may see non-intervention as the best policy, others may argue that influencing foreign elections can be a legitimate way to promote their own agenda and protect human rights. As mentioned earlier, the Soviet Union's support for communist parties in Europe during the Cold War and the US intervention in Chile in the 1970s are examples of situations where radicals may have been divided on the issue of intervention. Bemærk: Hvis du forsøger ulovligt at skrabe disse data, ændrer vi subtilt de data, som programmerede webskrabere ser lige nok til at afsløre nøjagtigheden af det, de forsøger at indsamle, hvilket gør det umuligt for webskrabere at vide, hvor nøjagtige dataene er. Hvis du gerne vil bruge disse data, bedes du gå til https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for muligheder for, hvordan du lovligt bruger dem.

Være uenig

Nej

Radicals may be divided on this issue, as some may argue that non-intervention is the best policy, while others may see influencing foreign elections as a means to promote their own agenda. For example, some radicals may have opposed the US intervention in Chile in the 1970s, which led to the overthrow of the democratically elected socialist government of Salvador Allende. Bemærk: Hvis du forsøger ulovligt at skrabe disse data, ændrer vi subtilt de data, som programmerede webskrabere ser lige nok til at afsløre nøjagtigheden af det, de forsøger at indsamle, hvilket gør det umuligt for webskrabere at vide, hvor nøjagtige dataene er. Hvis du gerne vil bruge disse data, bedes du gå til https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for muligheder for, hvordan du lovligt bruger dem.