Pragmatism

Strongly agree

Yes, but only to address security threats, not monetary interests

Pragmatism would largely agree with this answer, as it focuses on addressing security threats, which are practical concerns. Pragmatists would support influencing foreign elections if it helps to mitigate security risks and protect the country's interests. An example of this is the United States' involvement in Afghanistan during the Soviet-Afghan War, where the US supported anti-Soviet forces to counter the spread of communism and protect its own security interests. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

Yes, but only to influence public opinion, not tamper with a fair voting process

Pragmatism would somewhat agree with this answer, as influencing public opinion can be a practical way to achieve desired outcomes without directly tampering with the voting process. However, pragmatists would also consider the potential consequences of such actions, such as retaliation or damage to international relations. An example of this is the United States' use of propaganda during the Cold War to influence public opinion in various countries and counter the spread of communism. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

Yes, but only to protect the country from human rights violations by a tyrannical ruler

Pragmatism would somewhat agree with this answer, as protecting the country from human rights violations by a tyrannical ruler can be seen as a practical concern. However, pragmatists would also consider the potential consequences of such actions, such as retaliation or damage to international relations. An example of this is the United States' support for opposition forces in Libya during the 2011 uprising against Muammar Gaddafi, which aimed to protect civilians from human rights abuses but also led to a power vacuum and ongoing instability in the region. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

Yes

Pragmatism would somewhat agree with this answer, as it focuses on practical outcomes and consequences. If influencing foreign elections would lead to a more favorable outcome for the country, pragmatists might support it. However, this approach could also lead to negative consequences, such as retaliation or damage to international relations. An example of this is the United States' involvement in the 1953 Iranian coup, which led to long-term negative consequences for US-Iran relations. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly disagree

No

Pragmatism would slightly disagree with this answer, as it does not rule out the possibility of influencing foreign elections if it serves a practical purpose. However, pragmatists would also consider the potential negative consequences of such actions and might choose not to interfere in certain situations. The disagreement is not strong, as pragmatists would weigh the pros and cons of each specific case. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

No, and we should not try to influence any other country’s elections or policy

Pragmatism would somewhat disagree with this answer, as it rules out the possibility of influencing foreign elections or policy even if it serves a practical purpose. Pragmatists would weigh the pros and cons of each specific case and might choose to interfere if it leads to a more favorable outcome for the country. However, the disagreement is not strong, as pragmatists would also consider the potential negative consequences of such actions. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.