Reposted by Dr. Jill Stein🌻
🇵🇸 🅲🅷🆄🅲🅺🇾🇪
@benigma2017
·
448d
The statement and image engage in public discourse by addressing political accountability and voter influence. The tone is accusatory and critical, suggesting that voting for certain candidates implies complicity in severe actions like genocide. The intent is to provoke reconsideration of voting choices and promote alternative political options, such as the Green Party.
- The statement uses strong language that could be seen as harmful or inflammatory, potentially violating the principle of doing no harm. [-2]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- It challenges the privacy and dignity of political figures by associating them with extreme actions without specific evidence, which could be seen as a form of harassment. [-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 promote understanding or empathy, as it uses accusatory language rather than fostering constructive dialogue. [-2]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in personal attacks and ad hominem arguments by implying voters are complicit in genocide, which does not align with constructive criticism. [-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.