Questions about the current attitude of Russians which might not be possible to answer accurately. Should I ask them?

Question

I have some questions on my mind like:

• What portion of the Russian population is strongly pro-Putin? How has it developed over time? (Is it 70% pro Putin or 70% anti-Putin but do not dare to speak up or something else.)
• What portion of Russians know basic true statements about the current war? (Like how many soldiers are approximately involved, which areas have been occupied, ... basically how well do rumors counteract official misinformation)
• What portion of Russians support the war? (or whatever it is called in Russia, but only makes sense if Russians know at least some basic statements about it)
• ...

I think these questions are interesting (to me) because I want to learn what drives a population to support such a war. Although it seems a bit more like sociology and maybe not enough politics. But attitudes towards a war should still be reasonably on-topic here, or do they not?

I also think that there should in principal a clear answer to these questions existing. A single number actually in the examples above.

But it will be very hard, next to impossible to get it with confidence. With Russia being an autocracy you simply don't get independent opinion polling that can be trusted.

Maybe I have to settle on simply not knowing these things. And in the current situation, there is anyway a very high risk to attract propaganda instead. I might end up contributing negatively to the knowledge stored here.

Should I ask these questions or not? Is there maybe an alternative that I could ask for that has a higher chance to give some accurate information without being spammed by misinformation?

As pointed out by Roger Vadim in his answer, this problem applies in part to every country. Everywhere there will be an error in the estimations of the public opinion. However, I would argue that currently for Russia this error might be extremely large and might make the answers to all such questions not very useful.

Answer 1

No, I don't think that it is useful to post these questions at this time. There is simply not enough information available to give you reliable answers.

And by the way, questions asking for public opinion on certain questions are always iffy, because the results of opinion polls are heavily influenced by the poll itself. Like this scene from the 1980s UK political comedy show Yes, Minister illustrates very well.

Answer 2

Should I ask these questions or not?

Yes, please ask these questions. AFAIK, the policy of the site allows and encourages such questions, and no one single person (not even a moderator) has the power to off-topic these types of questions, specifically questions related to a nation being subjected to war crimes (I mean Ukraine).

Is there maybe an alternative that I could ask for that has a higher chance to give some accurate information without being spammed by misinformation?

Threaten the users with 15 years of Gulag if they spam you with misinformation! But seriously, this is a million dollar question. I have only a few workarounds for this question:

• I remind the posters that they need to bring facts (as in with references and sources) to the table and leave their opinions at home. A strict admonition with a link to the Help center can go a long way.

• For known hard questions, I promise the posters bounties, which I will actually give to good answers. I back up this promise with my rep, and with the fact that I actually have given bounties to good answers post factum on this and other SE sites.

There is more than one way to do it (or, some examples):

What does Russian government have to gain from the current build up and threatening possible invasion of Ukraine?
What's the basis for preparations to imminent Russian invasion into Ukraine?
Change how numbers are printed in psql

Answer 3

But it will be very hard, next to impossible to get it with confidence. With Russia being an autocracy you simply don't get independent opinion polling that can be trusted.

Note that autocracy is not an official designation, but just a callword. Its meaning is vague, and often depends on the context. E.g., many people have referred to Trump presidency as dictatorship, and similar rhetoric is often used elsewhere - e.g., it was extensively used to describe the French president during the Yellow vest protests. Does this make the US or France autocracies/dictatorships? One can only speak of degrees, which peobably mean that any presidential republic is more autocratic than a parliamentary one.

Similarly, when speaking more generally about lack of democracy one have to consider a spectrum, ranging from Scandinavian demicracies on the one hand, passing through somewhat flawed democracies of western Europe and the US and then through many other countries, ending with Iran, Saudi Arabia, and, finally, closed societies like North Korea, with Russia and China somewhere in between:

Scandinavia > Western Europe > USA >...> Russia > China >...> Iran > Saudi Arabia > North Korea

Russians are able to travel abroad, and hence exposed to western society. Russians extensively use internet (even if restricted since a few days). Russians vote, including voting for candidates other than Putin. Russians express their opinions in social nets and manifest in support of Ukraine. There are multiple opposants, think tanks and independent media in Russia, which are not controlled by government - maximum that one could claim is that their activities are somewhat restricted due to their ties to the West (Note that similar restrictions exist in the US, e.g., Ruppert Murdoch ahd to become a US citizen to found Fox News). Calling Russia authocracy neglects all this complexity and a wealth of information that is available.

Thus, I would say that our inability to say what Russians think or know about the war has more to do with objective reasons that apply to any country, rather than only to Russia:

Where could such information come from?

• Independent polling, e.g., like the one done by Levada center in Russia - these are subject to statistical errors and sampling problems
• Votes held by elected representatives - e.g., the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 can be interpreted as Americans overwhelmingly supporting the invasion of Iraq. Here one can doubt to what extent the opinion of the elected representatives reflects that of the population.
• Public protests - in these one never knows whether they represent the silent majority of the population or only a vocal minority
• Opinions expressed in social networks - again, these are an imperfect sample of the population: at best one learns opinions of a few persons, and many of these are not the most intelligent folks with too much free time on their hands.