Michael Schellenberger

The statement critiques Germany's defense spending relative to NATO and suggests reevaluating the US-Germany relationship. It implies dissatisfaction with Germany's contribution to NATO and questions the fairness of the US's financial burden. The tone is critical and suggests a need for policy reassessment.

1. Principle 1:

   I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.

   The statement does not directly harm but implies criticism of Germany's defense spending, which could strain diplomatic relations. [-1]
2. Principle 2:

   I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.

   The statement respects privacy but indirectly questions Germany's commitment to NATO, which could be seen as a form of public criticism.
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 criticism but lacks constructive dialogue or solutions, focusing instead on highlighting disparities. [-1]
4. Principle 6:

   I will use my influence for the betterment of society.

   The statement uses influence to question international relations, potentially prompting discussion on defense spending and alliances. [+1]