Rashida Tlaib

Rank 2 of 47
|
Score 221

The statement is emotionally charged and addresses a highly sensitive and controversial public issue, namely the conflict in Gaza. It accuses the audience of complicity or support for what the author describes as a genocide, and it includes a call to remember and acknowledge the events. The statement also links to an external website, which may provide further context or information.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement uses strong language that could be seen as harmful or inflammatory, potentially inciting anger or distress. This could be considered a violation of the principle to do no harm with words and actions. [-2]
  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 direct cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but it does make a broad accusation against the audience, which could be seen as disrespectful to their dignity. [-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; instead, it seems to aim at provoking guilt or outrage. [-2]
  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 does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue; it makes a sweeping accusation without inviting discussion or understanding from those who may disagree. [-2]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement uses its platform to draw attention to a significant issue, which could be seen as an attempt to use influence for societal betterment, but the accusatory tone may undermine this effort. [+1]
  6. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement exercises free speech but does so in a manner that may not be considered responsible or with integrity, given its accusatory and inflammatory nature. [-1]