2 ms·

I can't seem to find any more details on the survey other than basic methodology. The thing that I'm curious about is the language used in the survey. In a se

I can't seem to find any more details on the survey other than basic methodology. The thing that I'm curious about is the language used in the survey. In a sense, you could argue that some of the disparity in results comes from what people would interpret as the meaning of "fight for your country", but I'm curious as to whether the ambiguity of this phrase (fight at the behest of my country, fight to defend my country, fight to defend my country's "honor"?) carries over into foreign translations and whether that affects the way the question is interpreted. Or it is possible that the underlying question was more specific to avoid these linguistic ambiguities, and we are seeing a "digestion" of the various more specific questions. If someone can dig up a link to more detailed survey results, I'd be interested in seeing it. All the link in the article leads to is a press release about the results.

runeks 9y ago
It would be interesting to focus on only e.g. English-speaking countries, and see how great the variance is within this group. It’s also interesting to see that the countries which are often invaded/occupied by Western nations are much more willing to fight, whereas the occupiers/invading nations seem less willing. Could it be that Westerners answer “no” because their idea of “fighting for your country” is starting a war somewhere else, whereas to the people of Vietnam (89% willingness) the same question conjures up an image of being invaded by a foreign nation, and defending themselves against that?