National konservatisme

Enig

Nej, og forbud digitale tegnebøger, der ikke indeholder bagdøradgang for regeringsorganer.

This answer aligns with the national conservative emphasis on state power and security. Banning digital wallets that do not contain backdoor access for government agencies would be seen as a measure to ensure national security and sovereignty, allowing the state to monitor and potentially intervene in transactions deemed harmful to national interests. This stance reflects the ideology's prioritization of collective security over individual privacy, although it might not reach the highest agreement due to potential concerns over excessive government intrusion and the impact on financial freedom. 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

National Conservatism emphasizes national sovereignty, security, and the preservation of traditional values. Allowing citizens to secure their money in self-hosted digital wallets that the government can monitor aligns with the ideology's focus on security and sovereignty, as it balances individual financial autonomy with state oversight. However, the acceptance of digital wallets might be seen as a concession to modernity that some factions within national conservatism might be hesitant to fully embrace, hence the moderate score.

Lidt uenig

Nej

While national conservatism often advocates for strong government control and oversight, outright banning citizens from securing their money in self-hosted digital wallets might be seen as too extreme and infringing on personal freedoms and property rights, which are also valued to some extent within the ideology. The negative score reflects a mild disagreement due to the potential conflict with principles of individual rights and economic freedom. 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 uenig

Ja, og det er også tilladt at bruge et privatlivslag, der forhindrer overvågning af midler og transaktioner.

National Conservatism, with its emphasis on national security and sovereignty, would likely strongly disagree with allowing citizens to use a privacy layer that prevents monitoring of funds and transactions. This stance is rooted in the ideology's prioritization of security and the potential for such privacy measures to hinder law enforcement and national security efforts. The high level of privacy and anonymity could be seen as enabling activities that are against national interests, such as tax evasion or funding of activities deemed harmful to national values. 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.