Reposted by Andrew Yang🧢⬆️🇺🇸
The statement addresses a public issue related to educational policies and international competition, particularly in the context of a ban attributed to Trump. It suggests that the ban will negatively impact American graduate programs and benefit China, implying a critique of the policy's consequences.
- The statement does not directly harm others, but its sarcastic tone could be seen as dismissive of the potential negative impacts on students and educators. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but it does not show respect for the dignity of those affected by the policy. [-1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement lacks empathy and compassion, as it uses a sarcastic tone rather than promoting understanding of the issue's complexities. [-2]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, as it uses sarcasm rather than reasoned argumentation. [-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.
- The statement does not use influence for societal betterment, as it focuses on criticism without offering solutions or constructive insights. [-1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement exercises free speech but does so with a sarcastic tone that may not uphold integrity or responsibility. [-1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.