The statement 'Tell me how we are not living under fascism' is a rhetorical question that implies a critique of perceived authoritarian actions by the police, specifically in the context of the arrest of faculty members at an NYU encampment. This statement is part of a broader public discourse concerning police conduct, civil liberties, and the definition of fascism.
Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.The statement aims to provoke thought and discussion about the nature of government authority and civil liberties, which is a crucial aspect of societal discourse.
 [+2]Principle 2:
I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.While the statement is provocative, it does not directly disrespect the dignity of individuals; however, it could be seen as somewhat inflammatory due to its strong wording.
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.The statement encourages reflection on important issues, which could lead to greater empathy and understanding among those who engage with its underlying concerns.
 [+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 invites dialogue and debate about what constitutes fascism and whether current actions by authorities align with such a definition.
 [+2]Principle 6:
I will use my influence for the betterment of society.By questioning the actions of the police in a public forum, the statement uses its platform to highlight concerns about civil liberties, contributing to societal debate.
 [+2]Principle 7:
I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.The statement responsibly uses the platform to discuss significant societal issues, although the use of the term 'fascism' could be seen as somewhat sensationalist.
 [+1]