In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
331d
Fernand Kartheiser
@FernKartheiser
·
331d
The statement engages in public discourse by addressing concerns about the European Commission's actions related to censorship and its implications for security and international relations. It questions the role of Americans in defending the EU, framing the EU as totalitarian.
- The statement uses strong language that could be seen as inflammatory, potentially causing harm by escalating tensions between the EU and the US. This violates the principle of striving to do 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 use of 'totalitarian' could be seen as disrespectful to the dignity of EU institutions. [-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 promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it frames the EU negatively without offering constructive dialogue. [-1]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, instead using a confrontational tone that could be seen as a personal attack on the EU. [-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 upholds free speech by expressing a critical opinion on EU policies, but the responsibility and integrity of the platform are questionable due to the inflammatory language. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.