Reposted by Dr. Jill Stein🌻
Dr. Jill Stein🌻
@DrJillStein
·
505d
The statement and accompanying image engage in public discourse by addressing the issue of political party dynamics and election integrity. The tone is critical and satirical, suggesting that the Democratic Party is undermining democratic processes by invalidating Green Party signatures. The statement implies a critique of the idea that internal party reform is possible, using the Nevada case as evidence.
- The statement and image could be seen as harmful by promoting a divisive narrative and mocking individuals, which may contribute to polarization. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement and image do not respect the dignity of the individuals depicted, as they are caricatured and mocked. [-2]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement and image do not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion; instead, they foster a negative and accusatory tone. [-2]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue; it uses satire and mockery instead of reasoned argument. [-2]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 its platform to critique perceived injustices, which can be seen as an attempt to better society by highlighting issues in the political process. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech principles by expressing a critical viewpoint, but it does so in a manner that may not be responsible or constructive.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.