Does it take any great adjudication? I talk to conservatives in my real life. I talk to socialists in my real life. I can tell who among them are angry about real things and who are angry about things they imagined or read someone else fantasize about.
>I can tell who among them are angry about real things and who are angry about things
You only need to go to /r/all to see all the things that liberals are angry about.
>they imagined or read someone else fantasize about.
That just moves the issue from "whether people are angry" to "whether the issues are 'real' or not". If you're a liberal, of course you're going to think liberal causes are "real things" and dismiss conservative issues as "imagined".
There is a right wing media machine that generates culture war rage bait 24x7x365.
The right spends a massive amount of time being enraged over things most of them weren't thinking about at all before they were told it was the most important issue in the world and something they needed to be very angry about.
Reality has a left wing bias because the right has abandoned facts.
People can say whatever they want, but I don't think that's true at all. Each side uses different tactics and the left has really embraced appeasement and being unprovocative. Democratic Congressional leaders recently told members not to try to visit Kilmar Abrego Garcia because it was too provocative to voters in swing districts. Leaders of major universities and journalism are capitulating - not ironically, to that same right-wing anger routine. Newsom in CA, Adams in NYC, Fetterman from PA, and others are not outraged, they're adopting GOP positions and tactics. And what Democratic leader acts like Trump (and other Republicans like him)? What left-wing outlet is like Fox?
That's funny because if you ask the right, they'll probably say the same thing about the left. How do you adjudicate this?