In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
274d
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
274d
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
274d
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
274d
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
274d
The statement criticizes Democrats for allegedly supporting censorship, referencing the Global Engagement Center (GEC) and its funding. It implies a failure to act against what is perceived as a 'thought police.' The tone is accusatory and politically charged, suggesting a partisan perspective on government actions related to media and censorship.
- The statement uses charged language ('thought police') which may not promote understanding or empathy, potentially violating the principle of doing no harm. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in direct harassment or hate speech, but the accusatory tone could be seen as disrespectful to differing political views. [-1]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 constructive dialogue and instead uses a confrontational tone, which may hinder productive discourse. [-1]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 influence public opinion on a political issue, but the approach may not be seen as responsible or constructive.Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.