Yes, that one is kind of obvious and I hesitated about including it for that reason. But I remembered it because I studied the bible long before I became a voluntarist.
However, that quote still tells you that even those who promote such things know better. Larken already talked about changing the perspectives of those we disagree with in that video, but I would say that there are times when you just have to be blunt with the truth.
I was also schooled in the view that the light bringer Satan, was the figure who gave certain people the knowladge to manipulate, govern and enslave others. Inducing shame in others is a good way of doing that.
Yes, but notice that I said that one has to be on correct moral ground to use shame righteously. That makes all the difference in the world. The reason shame works negatively to "govern, manipulate and enslave others" is because they are already slaves to ego. It doesn't always work in one direction only.
If that's how one feels after speaking truth, then it's not coming from a righteous place. I've seen shame come from a different place than that and work positively on occasion. I remember Stephan Molyneux has said something similar saying that using moral arguments is far more effective than using logical arguments.
Again, please don't take the fact that he is now a Trump statist as reason to not see the truth. This would be a form of argument known as "ad-hominem". The truth will often times show up where you least expect it.
Of course, but this isn't quite correct:
It's not about whether one feels righteous but whether one really is. Someone doing all the things you say above obviously isn't.
You have to make sure that you are on solid ethical ground and shame ideally isn't caused by accusation (as in public shaming), but by the realization of wrongdoing which can happen in multiple ways when the truth is exposed.