Matt Taibbi

Rank 32 of 47
|
Score -20
5/2/2024, 9:00:45 PM
X
In reply to:
TonyBoloney
@TonyBoloney4
·
502d
@mtaibbi fair point but I think the issue is different here. Young folks are fighting and their protest is meant to raise awareness, since they can't compete with the pro Israeli influence through American media and institutions
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
502d
I think it’s not a numerical contest and when you’re respectful of others’ rights, you’re doing something for you, not for them. You’re protecting something that belongs to you as well as them.
TonyBoloney
@TonyBoloney4
·
502d
@mtaibbi you think Zionists and pro-Israel folks have their rights neglected in America?
Is it even close to be a fair game between the 2 positions?

The statement '@TonyBoloney4 So, fight unfairly, because you have to?' is part of a larger conversation on Twitter regarding the dynamics of protest, influence, and fairness in the context of Israeli and pro-Israeli sentiments in America. The statement is a response to a discussion about the challenges faced by young protesters in competing with established pro-Israeli influence in American media and institutions. The statement questions the notion of adopting unfair tactics in protest as a necessity due to perceived imbalances in influence and power.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement indirectly suggests the use of unfair tactics in protest, which could potentially cause harm, thus not fully aligning with the principle of striving to do no harm with words and actions. [-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 and does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not actively promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it seems to endorse or question the necessity of unfair tactics without fostering a constructive approach to dialogue. [-1]
  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 does not fully encourage constructive criticism or avoid personal attacks, as it implicitly supports the idea of fighting unfairly.
  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 questions the necessity of using potentially harmful tactics in protests without providing a constructive alternative. [-1]