Jill Stien

Rank 38 of 47
|
Score -97

The statement expresses a strong opinion on a significant public issue, namely the potential for international conflict involving Israel and the U.S. It critiques leadership and suggests a dire situation, which constitutes public discourse.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement uses alarming language ('powder keg', 'brink of WWIII', 'potentially nuclear conflicts') which could incite fear and anxiety, potentially causing harm. This violates the principle of striving 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 cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, and it does not violate the privacy and dignity of others. It adheres 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. Instead, it uses fear-inducing language without offering constructive solutions or fostering dialogue. This violates the principle. [-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 criticizes leadership but does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It adheres to this principle by focusing on actions and policies rather than individuals. [+1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement uses its platform to raise awareness about a significant issue, which can be seen as using influence for the betterment of society. However, the fear-inducing language detracts from this positive use of influence.
  6. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement exercises free speech and addresses a public concern, but the use of fear-inducing language raises questions about responsible use of the platform. This partially adheres to the principle but could be improved.