In reply to:
Heal the Divide
@HumansByDesign
·
11d
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
12d
The statement is part of a conversation that critiques corporate influence and propaganda, particularly in the context of Venezuela. It engages with public issues related to corporate power and its impact on society, thus constituting public discourse.
- The statement does not directly cause harm but critiques the use of rhetoric over substance, which can be seen as a call for more meaningful discourse. [+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. It maintains respect for privacy and dignity. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement indirectly promotes understanding by encouraging a focus on substance over rhetoric, which can lead to more informed discussions. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism by challenging the use of rhetoric, though it could be more specific in its critique to avoid potential misinterpretation as a personal attack.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 engaging in a critique of public discourse and corporate influence, using the platform to address societal issues. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.