Vivek Ramaswamy

Rank 22 of 47
|
Score 56

The statement constitutes public discourse as it engages with a public issue, specifically the role and function of the administrative state in governance. The tone is assertive and the intent is to advocate for a specific policy action, namely shutting down the administrative state as a means to help American workers and manufacturers.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm with words and actions, but the aggressive tone could be seen as polarizing. It neither clearly adheres to nor violates 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, and thus 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. It is more focused on advocating a specific policy action without fostering dialogue or empathy. [-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 does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments, but it also does not encourage constructive criticism or dialogue with those in disagreement.
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement uses influence to advocate for a policy change, which could be seen as an attempt to better society from the speaker's perspective. However, it does not provide a balanced view or consider potential negative impacts. [+1]
  6. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds the principle of free speech and uses the platform to express a viewpoint, but the responsibility and integrity of the platform use could be questioned due to the lack of constructive dialogue and potential polarizing effect.