One more result, sample size 9, mostly re-affirming the preferences here

Government
Direct Democracy 45.3% (40.5)
Unitary Democracy 22.5% (23.4)
Federal Republic 13.5% (15.5)

I still have my own reservations towards referenda as a decision tool, it led to Brexit after all...

The problem is mainly the yes/no nature of referenda without having to weigh the consequences. The wording of a question can easily bias the outcome. And with social echo chambers being the norm nowadays I kinda see it as another polarizing tool.
However it's better than a 2 party Federal Republic!

Ideally there would be more parties to represent more different views. And instead of direct yes/no questions for a referendum more detailed choices involving where the money should come from. A bit like the surveys my county sends out to poll public opinion on policy changes, showing the cost of each choice in the questionnaire.

While I'm for a unitary democracy on national scale, the way my county operates with public engagement is quite nice. My kid just had a half hour talk with the mayor at his school yesterday shedding more light on how little power he actually has. Basically forced by the provincial government to expand our town at too rapid pace which has many people angry here. He said he was glad houses in the newest developments are selling slowly (only 12 sold out of 600 in one, started development 3 years ago) In another subdivision residents have gone to court to block the next development which would 'wreck' their neighborhood as the only access to the private land they want to build 400 housing units on is by a narrow rural road serving a couple dozen homes.

Anyway more input on local issues works better than on national and foreign issues. I think that's better left up to representational government. The hard part is where to make the line between local and national issues. Nationally we need more affordable housing, locally we don't have the infrastructure to double in size over a span of 20 years. We're at just under 15,000 now, still supposed to climb to 25,000. We're already bussing some kids over to neighboring towns because schools are full, meanwhile traffic jams are becoming more frequent without room to expand the roads. No public transport.

Yet of course if you put it to a referendum, all towns would likely say no... We have plenty of room to build new towns though, it would be smart too to start developing further North with climate change. Problem is the province doesn't want to pay for the infrastructure...

Economy
Social Democracy 34.7% (26.5)
Classic Liberalism 20.2% (22.8)
Mixed Markets 12.0% (14.1)
Socialism 10.9% (12.3)
Market Socialism 10.6% (11.9)

Society
Progressivism 44.2% (47.3)
Freedom 25.8% (18.9)
Societal Justice 11.1% (12.5)

Religion
Atheist 39.3% (42.1)
Secular 30.8% (24.3)
Hybrid 18.8% (21.2)

Security
Procedural 57.0 (56.2)
Humanist 16.7% (18.8)
Reformist 15.2% (12.5)
Law & Order 11.1% (12.5)

Foreign Policy
Internationalist 43.0% (35.9)
Nationalist 19.3% (21.7)
Sovereignist 18.5% (20.9)
Assimilationist 10.0% (11.3)

This is kind of where I'm at. It seems to me that fascism and authoritarianism is pretty much the inevitable end result of the 2-party presidential systems that dominate in the Americas and much of East/Southeast Asia, as we've seen with the U.S. at the federal and state levels, the Philippines, South Korea, and too many Latin American countries. I find myself increasingly supporting direct referenda as a bulwark to the failings of elected officials, and even then, those elected officials try their best to manipulate the vote in referenda as well as doing ther best to defang referenda that they don't like, as is the case with recent referenda protecting reproductive rights, as well as Oklahoma's attempts to override the overwhelming will of the people when it comes to legal cannabis products. I might be less cynical about letting representative government take its course if it were truly representative, but I grew up in a state where I was effectively at the whims of people with rather extreme views who are openly disdainful of my views, since the winner-takes-all, first-past-the-post system means that they can treat people like NPCs and not suffer any political or legal consequences for it, and am only experiencing the feeling of having any actual voice in my government for the first time in my life in middle age since I moved out of that state. I will likely never live in the Bible Belt again.  This would also apply to me if I had been a hard conservative living in a state like Massachusetts.  The cliche of "democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep deciding what is for dinner" has always made me roll my eyes, because the "wolves" are already deciding what's for dinner, with zero input from the "sheep."

I'm also increasingly cynical about the concept of separation of powers as it pertains to executive power. I feel that the president should never have been given full separation of powers from the legislature and the Constitution should have made it clear that the President is firmly subordinate to Congress in all matters. It should not require an elaborate political process with an impossibly high bar to remove a bad president, and we should not be bound to a rigid four year election cycle. Paradoxically, I do feel that the roles of head of state and head of government should absolutely have been separated. Those are nuances that aren't covered by this quiz. 

I believe a president shouldn't have any special power, no executive orders nonsense. The president should have as much power as the king/queen in the UK. A figure head for foreign relations and to address the nation. All decisions should be made by the political parties. And not by a 2 party system, there's no debate / consensus when you simply have one party in the majority.

Individuals shouldn't have far reaching power, it's no good in private companies, it's no good in government. What good is representational government when one person can mess up the whole country. What good is democracy if we place so much power in one person...

Same as veto power (UNSC) and requiring unanimous decisions (EU parliament) are unworkable.

Democracy needs a lot of work.

I am a synthesis anarchist/neo-proudhonian* mutualist

The results aren't surprising. The policy specific questions were EU-centric though. 

(*neo because without Proudhon's misogyny and antisemitism and considering the last ~150 years of change since Proudhon)

Two very different new results to add to the averages:

Changing the average to

Government
Direct Democracy 37.1% (45.3)
Unitary Democracy 27.5 (22.5)
Federal Republic 11.0% (13.5)

Economy
Social Democracy 36.5% (34.7)
Classic Liberalism 16.5% (20.2)
Market Socialism 15.3% (10.6)
Mixed Markets 11.2% (12.0)

Society
Progressivism 45.2 (44.2)
Freedom 30.2% (25.8)

Religion
Atheist 40.2% (39.3)
Secular 31.8 (30.8)
Hybrid 18.9 (18.8)

Security
Procedural 52.0% (57.0)
Humanist 17.4% (16.7)
Reformist 12.4% (15.2)

Foreign Policy
Internationalist 44.3% (43.0)
Nationalist 15.8% (19.3)
Sovereignist 15.2% (18.5)

Federal republic is losing more ground as well as "My country first"