Marianne Williamson

Rank 21 of 47
|
Score 57
10/27/2024, 7:45:48 AM
X
In reply to:
Organic Non-Robot Tweeter
@MarsinScorp
·
256d
@marwilliamson I like you Marianne. I think I even kicked a few bucks your way on one of your runs. I made a bunch of memes of you that were positive. I come from an environmentalist background. Many people know it’s important to act, but we also don’t trust our institutions or organizations.…
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
256d
@MarsinScorp The realization of the depth of the crisis is a separate issue from which proposed solutions we choose for dealing with it. The "solutions are always (this or that)" is just a cover meant to distract us from forming the consensus that WE MUST ACT.
Organic Non-Robot Tweeter
@MarsinScorp
·
256d
@marwilliamson There’s aspects of it that are very scammy. Especially the “solutions” that always seem to make the poor poorer and consolidate power in the hands of the elite.
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
256d
Should he win, Trump's complete denial of the climate crisis creates a horrifying prospect for the next four years. He calls it "one of the great scams."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-n…

The statement is part of a broader conversation about climate change and public trust in institutions, which constitutes public discourse. The tone is supportive and reflective, indicating agreement with the concerns raised about institutional trust and environmental action.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does no harm and is supportive, aligning with the principle of doing no harm with words and actions. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding and empathy by expressing agreement with concerns about environmental issues and institutional trust. [+1]
  3. 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, instead participating in a constructive dialogue. [+1]