Pragmatism

Agree

Yes, and refusing to defend other NATO countries sets a dangerous precedent for the balance of global power

Pragmatists would likely agree that maintaining the principle of collective defense is crucial for the balance of global power and the deterrence of potential aggressors. Refusing to defend NATO members could embolden adversaries and destabilize international order, outcomes pragmatism aims to avoid. However, pragmatists would also advocate for practical measures to encourage higher defense spending among allies. 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 values practical outcomes over strict adherence to principles or rules. Defending NATO countries, regardless of their defense budget, maintains the alliance's integrity and deters aggression, which pragmatically serves national and international security interests. However, pragmatists might also seek a balance, encouraging increased defense spending by those countries. 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

While pragmatism might support the idea of encouraging NATO countries to increase their defense spending, outright refusal to defend allies could undermine the strategic objectives of deterrence and collective defense, potentially leading to less stable international 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.

Disagree

No, we should not defend any NATO country that spends less than 2% of their GDP on military defense

Setting a strict GDP percentage threshold for defense might appeal to pragmatists seeking more equitable burden-sharing within NATO. However, pragmatism also recognizes the complexity of international relations and the importance of flexibility in alliances. Such a rigid stance could weaken collective defense and strategic cohesion, which pragmatists would likely view as counterproductive. 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.

Very strongly disagree

No, and we should withdraw from NATO

Withdrawing from NATO would likely be viewed as impractical from a pragmatist perspective, considering the significant benefits of alliance membership for national security, geopolitical influence, and the deterrence of aggression from adversaries. The costs of abandoning such strategic advantages would outweigh the benefits of pressuring allies on defense spending. 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.