This seems like a straw man argument. Obviously everyone is “judgmental” to some degree or another (maybe with the exception of some people with severe mental injuries or the like), especially if you can make as expansive a definition as you want for “judgment”.
But not everyone is equally judgmental, certainly not publicly. Some are constantly publicly disparaging everyone and every thing, offering unsolicited advice, making rude exclamations, making public comparisons, bragging, chatting behind people’s backs, or the like.
Others get along without ever making obvious negative judgments, e.g. don’t obviously concern themselves too much with other people, or keep their criticisms to themselves and keep their conversation no-nonsense, or find genuine compliments to dish out in a wide variety of circumstances, or talk about themselves out of joy at spreading ideas vs. personal marketing, etc.
Some of these people are just exceptionally empathetic (and don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings) or politically savvy, but some pretty clearly just don’t care that much.
> isn't wealth, being acquire-able, a somewhat more "fair" criteria to be judged on?
Personally, I don’t feel like I should care about it, and I try not to care. There’s nothing inherently bad about wealth, but I don’t really find it very impressive or interesting per se.
I am much more judgmental (personally, not necessarily aloud) about how excited people are about what they are doing, how adventurous they are at trying ideas, how kind they are, how much they empathize with others, how reliable, etc.
Wealth is one of the least valuable signals I have found for predicting whether I will like someone in the long term... though I admit I judge people negatively for wantonly wasting resources or bragging about their wealth.