User:RD/9k/uranium rule (Q618)

Main entries

uranium rule
/ Don't do what you would not want uniquely privileged upper-class people to do -> on one hand, this rule is baked into Liberal-republicanism. on the other hand, many people don't succeed at following it all the time, and often stop following it at the worst times they could pick.

a name for this rule: uranium is bad if you let it out uncontrolled. Americium has a low level of radioactivity and in a sense is easier to dispose of (although the method is not complete yet apparently).
uranium rule / Do unto others as upper classes should do unto you / Do not what will filter up / Do not unto others as upper classes should not do unto you (uranium inverse)
americium rule
/ Do unto others as lower classes should do unto you / Do not what will filter down / Don't do in an upper class or position of authority what you don't want common people to do / Do not unto others as lower classes should not do unto you (americium inverse) -> rule followed by the Communist Party of China, but often not followed by elected officials in the United States. that makes the name pretty ironic, but then again, who actually follows the golden rule on the issues that actually make people mad? when it comes to Idealism, the failure to follow a rule might be better evidence for it applying.

atomic table of behavioral rules
(existential materialism) / existential-materialist metallic rule / periodic table of rules (sic — they're not actually quantized or periodized; "atomic" is fine though)
Stupidity filters up
/ It isn't only the shovel dreams of class society that filter down through society from ruling classes — stupidity common among the whole population at large also filters up to all ruling classes until some of them finally manage to use their privilege to become aware that the ideas seemingly everybody believes are wrong / (9k) -> gosh, this is. nearly the same as the uranium rule except it's way more specific, singling out "stupidity" instead of "harmful behaviors" in general. I guess these are separate propositions?? they're so incredibly similar I'm going to have to put "uranium rule" onto this proposition somewhere though