Reposted by Matt Taibbi
The statement appears to be a critique of intellectuals and economists who are perceived to be out of touch with the general population's economic concerns. It uses hyperbolic language to suggest that these professionals are dismissive of voters' intelligence and circumstances, and it implies that their assessments of the economy are based on a narrow perspective that does not account for the full reality of the situation.
- The statement uses sarcastic and potentially harmful language, which could be seen as doing harm with words. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not directly violate the privacy and dignity of others, but the tone is disrespectful. [-1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. Instead, it mocks a group of people for their perceived detachment. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism but does so in a way that could be construed as a personal attack rather than constructive dialogue. [-1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.