I make no judgement about which is "better" or "worse" - they both have positives and negatives. Inevitably, and obviously, you can probably figure out which one you fall into based on which one you react to.
In the first case, you view the world around you and yours. You see events and think "how does this affect me and people like me". If taxes are going up this means I get less money.
The alternative is through the lens of "how does this affect others." - them and theirs - yes, taxes are going up, but those in need will get better medical care, and I already have enough money myself.
It's not just about money. Basically every policy discussion revolves around "us" and "them". Immigration, inflation, exploitation, environment, defense, guns and do on. How will this affect me and mine. How will it affect them and theirs.
Inevitably every policy has an impact on a continuum, but too often the extreme is presented by media to reinforce one end of the spectrum. Thus the extremes start to matter more than the nuanced middle ground.
More than that. Seeing that is the first step in "not being a dick"
An additional aspect which is the reason I'm fairly left leaning is that I really dislike encounters with downtrodden people so I will gladly pay more taxes to prevent/save them from being that way.
I could not live in a place with a homelessness issue like LA.
Don’t like if I film you? Ha ha! It’s not illegal so I’m going to deliberately film you, and by the way, in other ways I’m going to also go right up to the line of what’s illegal and not cross it, because I can and because it irritates you.
Pretty much any time you see somebody clamoring about their rights, and ignoring any talk about responsibility (or talking about your responsibilities but not theirs), you can tell the conversation isn't going to go well.