I agree but I'll say it differently. I don't believe anyone can ever have a personal grievance with one they have never personally interacted with.

If you have personal grievances and you choose not to lobby for your self-interest then you've deemed those grievances as unimportant, or subordinate to some personal principle of yours. I'm sure because it is a tautology that if you have a compelling enough self-interest to advocate for yourself in some social context, be it the workplace, school, the household, local government, national government, social media or any place really, you will. Because that's what any rational human being would do.

What you are implying is that those other people are valuing their grievances incorrectly: They aren't as important as they think they are. After all, you don't value your own grievances as much.

I think that's a logical error.

And rooted in all of this, and I am not accusing you of doing this because we haven't brought up any specific examples, but there's a cognitive bias that people have where they think they can judge other peoples' life experiences just as well as those people, and that their value judgments are in some way objective and do not depend on the differences in social context between them and those people.

Most modern ideologies that aren't some authoritarian or paternalistic drivel soundly disagree with such fallacious reasoning.

My point of view is that I'm not as smart as I think I am about other people, and if I had a tv show I could use as a bully pulpit I wouldn't be using it to say "lol what a bunch of s aren't they so stupid and absurd"?

Because I think that's gross.