I'm taking you're from the US from the "either team" comment. That is a
really elementary understanding of politics. Politics, again, is a word describing how humans behave in groups. Where are roads built? That's a political decision made by groups of humans reaching consensus. What is the budget for the local security force? That's a political decision made by groups of humans reaching consensus. How much money is going to be collected from everyone locally to pay for those roads and security? That's a political decision made by groups of humans reaching consensus. If you're even allowed to participate in the consensus process... that itself is politics! For most of recorded history, decisions were made by the consensus of clergy, nobility and royalty, who coerced the rest of society into supporting their consensus through organized violence. Are you allowed to own property? That is the result of your group reaching consensus saying you're allowed to.
> How the produce of society is distributed and how people are cared for has zero relevance to an article about hacking a text editor,
The article is political. People make noise about Taiwan because an invasion of Taiwan would kill many and oppress more, in other words because it, like all political matters, is something that determines the course of lives of millions. Even if they are not directly affected, noise about politics escalates as a mechanism for people to protect themselves. When you are at the wrong end of a group that outnumbers you trying to kill you, you will require the aid of others. But will others come to your aid if you were not willing to come to their aid? This is how the concept of a "conscience" and "empathy" evolved -- because they give an evolutionary advantage, of providing for your own survival by ensuring collective survival.
Edit: for posterity, the comment I was replying to mentioned a "belief in either team leading you to the promised land", which has been edited out.