Marianne Williamson

Rank 16 of 47
|
Score 81
4/29/2025, 2:01:35 AM
X
In reply to:
Kurt
@kurtgx
·
47d
@hergie409 @marwilliamson Yeah, but what happens like in the current situation when the current system needs destroying? Are we too just close our eyes and go flying off the edge of the cliff?
Bret “with one T”
@hergie409
·
47d
@kurtgx @marwilliamson The authoritarian playbook is to tell you there is a big problem and by destroying everything around you and entrenching their power, they are going to “fix it”. This is an old tale, repeated over and over again but go ahead and pretend this is different
Kurt
@kurtgx
·
47d
@marwilliamson Yes, but what happens when you really really really need to drain the swamp? Are you just forever barred because Mussolini did something vaguely similar?
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
47d
“Drain the swamp” was a campaign initiated by Italy’s fascist dictator Mussolini, firing 35,000 civil servants as soon as his government gained power.

The statement 'We needed to disrupt the system - absolutely - but not destroy it' is part of a broader conversation about political systems and the balance between reform and destruction. The tone is moderate, suggesting a need for change without complete upheaval. The intent is to engage in a discussion about the appropriate level of systemic change needed in governance.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not use harmful language and suggests a balanced approach, aligning with the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by acknowledging the need for disruption while cautioning against destruction, fostering a more nuanced view. [+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 engages in constructive dialogue by responding to a previous comment with a reasoned perspective, avoiding personal attacks. [+1]