You and GGP both wrong in ironic ways.

GGP says don't care about X because it's a social phenomenon, but frequently this position is a form of social identification.

You say: X might deeper than social, implying that social phenomena are not important. Thus agreeing with GP.

[edit: my position is pragmatic: If there's a broad or important phenomenon, your position on it should be individualized to the value of the phenomenon itself, not based upon some theory-of-origin category assignment.]