In reply to:
Warren Gunnels
@GunnelsWarren
·
387d
The statement by @GunnelsWarren constitutes public discourse as it engages with a public issue, specifically the proposal of a 95% windfall profits tax on big corporations. The tone is critical and evaluative, questioning the timing and sincerity of the proposal.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm with words and actions. It is critical but not harmful. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. It is more focused on critiquing the political strategy.Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism of the political strategy but does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+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 uses influence to critique a public policy proposal, which can be seen as contributing to the betterment of society by encouraging more effective political action. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds the principles of free speech and uses the platform responsibly to engage in civic dialogue. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.