Marianne Williamson

Rank 21 of 47
|
Score 57
3/22/2024, 4:53:44 AM
X
In reply to:
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
469d
I told my new friend that the way Hitler had “improved the economy” was that he invaded countries and absorbed their industrial capacity, then turned Jews, gypsies, Black people, gay people, and political dissenters who could work into his veritable slaves (those who were too…
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
469d
I mentioned what John Kelly had said about Trump’s comment regarding Hitler: that Hitler “had done some good things, like improve the economy.” The gentleman I met said “Hitler was brilliant.” 2/4
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
469d
I met a man today who told me he’s voting for Trump. People have the right to do that and I was asking him about what issues he cares about. They sort of made sense. But then I asked him whether or not Trump‘s personality bothered him. 1/4

The statement is part of a conversation that touches on historical facts, political opinions, and moral judgments. It involves a comparison of two controversial figures, Trump and Hitler, and includes a contentious claim that 'even evil people do some good things.' The tone is conversational but deals with serious topics that have public interest and ethical implications.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to intend harm, but the comparison of Trump to Hitler and the acknowledgment of 'good' in evil can be harmful or offensive to some. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others, as it does not reveal personal information or engage in harassment. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement lacks empathy and compassion in the context of discussing Hitler, which can be deeply insensitive to those affected by his actions. [-2]
  4. 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.
    The statement engages in a form of dialogue but could be seen as dismissive of the atrocities committed by Hitler, which is not constructive. [-1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement does not clearly use influence for the betterment of society, as it could be interpreted as normalizing or diminishing the impact of historical atrocities. [-1]
  6. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds free speech but may lack responsibility in the comparison made, potentially spreading misinformation or insensitive views. [-1]