I don't think I've ever heard an actual person say they had a grievance and it wasn't a personal one or otherwise part of their cohort.

Given the answers in the thread people range from taking this as an invitation to (usually lazily) criticize or to joke about criticizing. Did anyone actually get something out of this?

Dialogue is an important enough reason by itself.

Oh definitely not. It's usually a big waste of time and that's part of my point: western leftists think they deserve to share opinions when they don't. This is because of how politics itself is presented and socialized in their cultures, the need to have and share opinions despite a lack of knowledge. We easily observe it those who don't agree with us while they just repeat whatever a talking head on TV said about respectability politics or how some judge is a secret deep state Obama plant etc etc. But we often overlook it in ourselves and each other - right until we try to do things and have some standards, then we find ourselves knee-deep in absolute garbage, wasting our time talking about things literally nobody in the room has investigated. Then we have to figure out how to make that not happen anymore, and then we all get to learn who is more in it for the feelings of validation from dunking and who's more interested in making correct informed choices.

If you are claiming that western leftist are too ignorant to form valid criticism, then I think this forum would be a great place to share your reasons why and add to the discussion.

As of this comment there are 136 replies. Only two cite at least one source to try and explain anything with any level of depth. Both are mostly just pushing back on the criticisms of OP or others. Most comments are a single sentence, maybe two, hastily thrown together to share an opinion that maybe occupied 30 seconds of thought. We can't even begin talking about validity, it's not a serious thread in the first place. But it does absolutely resemble every time-wasting exercise in western leftist discourse.

This is the Hexear Criticism of China post. lmao. This is my contribution to the post, directed generally outward: resist the urge to always have and share opinions. Spend that time reading or exercising or resting or really most other things are probably better.

I personally do not think it's beneficial to divide leftist against each other and claim one part of the hemisphere is particularly chauvinist.

It is entirely beneficial to correctly recognize chauvinist tendencies, but Western doesn't mean hemisphere in this context. I didn't make them chauvinist, that's just the historical and present reality, and it falls along lines similar to colonial chauvinism. To address this serious problem we must recognize that ie exists in the first place.

As someone who now lives in the West and is originally from the East, everyone is a bit chauvinist about their own locality, and everyone is going to be more familiar with their own locality. I think open communication between and about different cultures serves humanity a lot more than scolding.

I will give some examples of this form of chauvinism in action:

• Opposition to the industrialization of the global south, the building of productive forces in the global south. Sometimes out of an ideological commitment to idealism about what it means to be socialist or anticapitlist (why aren't the 'communists' living on communes and all being paid the same wages, they might say). Sometimes using climate change or other forms of logic.
• A rejection of nearly every socialist project as imperialist. Soviet imperialism, Chinese imperialism, etc etc. Every revolution that endured in a major country leads to accusations of imperialism by western leftists holding out for the one true form of Marxist construction not implied or described by Marx in the first place.
• An undying belief in the capacity and power of the working class in all contexts, but especially in contexts where they are Western and enjoined to oppression by contradictions rivaling capitalist relations (at the national level). For example, the western left has a long history of keeping ties with Israeli "leftists", labor Zionists, etc, and using them as primary contacts re: Palestine, not Palestinians, and forwarding the false belief that Israelis themselves will end Zionism through worker organizing of their own immediate volition. This also bleeds over into their very own countries where they struggle with tailist tendencies, opportunism in general.
• The aforementioned opportunism is tolerated, celebrated, explained. Other socialist projects without those issues do not get such explanations or tolerance, they must be explicitly rejected (sometimes as part of that tailism).

This site is free of a lot of that but not 100% free and it can always backslide.

I do agree that of course others can be chauvinist, that's not exclusive to westerners or western leftists. Nationalism itself brings with it chauvinism and it's a price paid knowingly by many projects. But one indication for why I'm getting at this can be expressed with that example: there is a substantive difference between nationalism from an imperial core native, a citizen of a major oppressing country, and the nationalism of someone in a country in which there is an active struggle, knowingly or unknowingly, for national liberation from those oppressor nations. Both are nationalism, but one is in favor of imperialist oppression, the other opposed.