Marianne Williamson

Rank 27 of 47
|
Score -6
5/28/2024, 5:19:25 PM
X
In reply to:
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
534d
Coup managers keep strict control; a political-media industrial complex polices the system so no one gets past the gates if he or she questions the basic tenets of a corporate controlled economy. “We have to go with Joe because he’s the one who can win” was a ruse from the…
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
534d
For the last 50 years, there has been a corporate coup in this country - shattering the promises of democracy, abolishing the middle class and leaving the majority of Americans in some mode of economic struggle. We’ve been living with a sociopath in the house for decades. 3/7
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
534d
Fascism now definitely threatens. But who do you blame at a certain point - the thief, or the people in the house who opened every door and every window making it so easy for him to come in? 2/7
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
534d
Franklin Roosevelt said we wouldn’t have to worry about a fascist takeover in this country as long as democracy delivered on its promises. 1/7

The statement constitutes public discourse as it engages with public issues, specifically the electoral process and political decisions. The tone is critical and accusatory, focusing on the perceived failures of political leadership and decision-making. The intent appears to be to critique the Democratic Party's decision-making process and its consequences.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm but uses strong language that could be seen as divisive. It does not promote violence or direct harm, so it partially adheres to this principle.
  2. 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 engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. It critiques political decisions and figures without resorting to personal attacks, thus adhering to this principle. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. It is more focused on criticism than on fostering a constructive dialogue, thus it does not align well with this principle. [-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 criticism but does not offer constructive dialogue or solutions. It does not engage in personal attacks but is accusatory in nature, partially adhering to this principle.
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement uses the platform to critique political decisions, which can be seen as an attempt to influence public opinion. However, it does not offer a clear path for the betterment of society, so it partially adheres to this principle.
  6. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds the principles of free speech and uses the platform to express a critical opinion. It does so responsibly without resorting to hate speech or personal attacks, thus adhering to this principle. [+1]