General Discussion

Most often employed when it's how they're treating us. (Or how s/he's treating me.) It makes for a nice feel-good cudgel.

But it's not about them. It's about me. I judge myself but you know, them? I don't judge them so much. Because I can't control them and so all that judgmentalism makes me feel real good, nice and self-righteous, but that just makes me even more insufferable and angry. And, you know, having read about behavior for a good 50+ years now, whenever large groups of people have wanted to 'control' the others beyond limited amounts you wind up with fascism and late-stage socialism. Hitler and Stalin. With censorship, laws against speech (like saying bad things about a group or the government, not that any democracy would do that, right?). Prohibitions against certain kinds of non-violent demonstrations. (And when applied only to others, you get things like violent demonstrations judged okay but non-violent but offensive demonstrations banned. Not that any small-d democrat would abide such political coercion.)

Or, on smaller scales, we get 'revolutionary' or 'majority reinforcing' organizations, whether the SLA or KKK. Or, on smaller scales, people like my abusive PhD advisor, the way my church (and others I've seen) go when after years of "just trying to make you all better people" without compliance it was time to get out the rough treatment and force people to be good or kick them out or even shun them. As if forced righteousness is anything more than strict social control that makes the authoritarians in charge feel good about themselves and makes the oppressed feel, well, oppressed. Maybe you feel good if you like the abuse?

Applying the golden rule (to our own behavior) is both hard and not adequate for achieving civility. But it is necessary. To get there requires others' buy in. But, repurposing Feynman, the first person you need to be critical of is yourself--if not, others will certainly do it for you and that's a lot less pleasant.