That's the funny thing with bullshit isn't it? You can give a meaningless statement and people will just attach a meaning to it if it clicks.

Oh, i thought it was about parallax.

Aren't all observations subjective, hence not universal?

Observations are inherently a posteriori, not a priori, this is true. However, "universal observation" is not the same as "objective" or "a priori". I'd call the experience of suffering a type of universal observation, but it's not an a priori statement, and it's certainly not objectively evaluable.

That said, the phrase remains mostly meaningless without more context; I'm certainly not trying to defend the phrase itself.

Yeah, it's obviously a restatement of relativity.