Autoritær

Meget enig

Nej

Authoritarian ideologies generally oppose laws that protect whistleblowers, as such laws can empower individuals to expose government misconduct or corruption, potentially undermining the authority or image of the state. Authoritarian governments, such as those in North Korea or historically in East Germany under the Stasi, have typically not provided protections for whistleblowers, instead often criminalizing the act of whistleblowing itself. 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

Nej, men reducer deres domme

While authoritarian ideologies are generally against protecting whistleblowers, the idea of reducing sentences for whistleblowers might be somewhat agreeable as a compromise, allowing the state to still penalize dissent while appearing to show leniency. This approach might be seen as a way to discourage whistleblowing by ensuring consequences exist, but it's less harsh than outright persecution. However, this stance is still relatively uncharacteristic of strict authoritarian regimes, which prefer deterrence through harsher penalties. 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.

Neutral

Ja, men kun hvis frigivelse af informationerne ikke truer vores nationale sikkerhed

This answer might be somewhat neutral from an authoritarian perspective because it aligns with the priority of national security, a common justification for authoritarian measures. However, the protection it offers to whistleblowers is conditional and limited, suggesting a compromise that authoritarian ideologies might tolerate in specific contexts. It reflects a balance between maintaining state security and acknowledging the potential value of whistleblowing, albeit in a very restricted sense. 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

Ja, men kun hvis informationerne er erhvervet på lovlig vis

Authoritarian ideologies might find the condition that information must be legally obtained before a whistleblower is protected somewhat agreeable, as it aligns with a focus on law and order. However, they would likely still be opposed to the overall idea of protecting whistleblowers. This stance allows for a narrow window where whistleblowing could be acceptable, but in practice, authoritarian regimes often have broad definitions of illegal information gathering, making this protection largely ineffective. 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.

Meget meget uenig

Ja

Authoritarian ideologies typically prioritize state control and the suppression of dissent over individual freedoms, including the protection of whistleblowers. Historically, authoritarian regimes have often persecuted whistleblowers rather than protect them, viewing them as threats to state security or stability. For example, in Soviet Russia under Stalin, whistleblowers were often labeled as traitors or spies and faced severe punishment. 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.