The statement and accompanying image critique the allocation of financial resources between defense and science in the United States, suggesting that fear (represented by defense spending) is a much stronger motivator than curiosity (represented by science funding). The statement uses specific budget figures to emphasize the disparity and provoke thought on national priorities.
- The statement aims to provoke thought without causing harm, focusing on budget allocations rather than personal attacks or divisive language. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- It respects the dignity of others by focusing on institutional spending rather than personal attributes or actions. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement and image use a creative comparison to promote understanding of how societal values might be reflected in budgetary priorities. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- It encourages a reevaluation of societal priorities, potentially leading to more empathetic or rational public policies. [+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.
- The statement is factual in presenting budget figures, allowing for constructive dialogue based on real data. [+1]Principle 5:I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
- By questioning the balance of spending, the statement uses its influence to encourage a discussion on bettering societal allocation of resources. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- It responsibly uses the platform to discuss a significant public issue, contributing to the civic dialogue on national budget priorities. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.