Amen Brother.
Somehow leftists in our day and age think it's acceptable to defend misorgynist, xenophobic, homophobic, violent ideas when they deriviate from outside the West. It is like those leftists in the 20s and 30s who went over to the USSR and praised it, despite the starvation in Ukraine..
The key to understanding modern 'progressivism' is that it is not really an ideology or well-thought out wisdom of the enlightened, as some laughably naive ones like to pretend while trying to put on childish airs that real progressives of the centuries past would find amusing. It is a form of reactionary tantrum-like actions that is the result of violent end and failures of extreme right-wing ideology that resulted in destruction of europe and causing the most deadly war in human history. You can see the almost allergic, hysterical reaction to anything remotely smelling right-wing in Europe as a proof of this.
While one should never forget the mistakes of war, the current modern day reactionaries have taken this to the extent where they no longer see anything wrong with portraying one side as epitome of evil and anything opposing it is better, while reality and people's nature is much more nuanced and complex than such innocent black and white theory. Irony is definitely not lost here. Some of the principles that characterize right-wing ideologies, such as harsh hierarchal discipline, fear-inducing dangers, and other such 'evil' things are a necessary harsh part of life which one must not run from, but confronted and dominated or swallowed whole so that one emerges stronger from it. You can never be stronger or grow by rejecting your problems, but only by completely getting it to the point it becomes as much of a problem as walking. By blindly rejecting anything that doesn't smell like sunshines and rainbows, relying on 'what feels good' as if life is a goddamn disney movie for kids or alice in the goddamn wonderland, you give rise to modern day liberalism that is scorned by its enemies, and shunned by realists, and collapses in the face of anything remotely resembling a threat from those that don't play by the same rules as the 'enlightened' ones do.
More importantly, the motivation that drives many modern 'liberals' is using it as a ideological and mental comforter to assure them that their 'fair' and 'mature' approach, which is actually nothing more than an excuse for trying to drive anything that makes them feel insecure or uncomfortable out by labeling it 'evil' and 'fascist'. More to the point, they are eager to use this as a cudgel against their own neighbors, while attempting to appear 'enlightened' in comparison by welcoming others who clutch their stomachs laughing at the utter ignorance and dream-like naivte of these people trying to appear better than their neighbors by being 'pals' with them. There is a reason why likes of Julian Assange is seen as a complete joke in many parts of non-western world, although they are of course in public encouraging him because he serves as a useful tool for irritating their perceived enemies. I wonder if Julian Assange should be seen as a pinnacle of morality, or a coward who likes to poke at those he believes are easier ideological targets, but unable to go after russia or china or even iran because they not only have the innate fortitude to laugh at some albino fool pretending to play the hero, but doing it in a way that showcases his utter inability to face those who have more pride, confidence and certainty other than the west that continuously battles with identity and standards wrecked in the legacy of ww2?
World War 2 for europe especially was a complete disaster on more ways than one, from which it has not yet fully recovered. Other nations like china, russia, or US could point directly to an external enemy and say, "We are fighting against THEM, they are at fault", without compromising their position and actually uniting their people closer together. Europe could do none of these things - lead by a foolish dictator whose sole role in history seemed to have been causing the downfall of europe by emphasizing its weakness in favor of strength (while confusing one for another), the west was forced to look only at its faults, while seemingly overwhelming war waged with most advanced technology world had seen up to that point, seemed to evidence that everything they believed in as strength was wrong (this wasn't true - only they confused the two with the shock of war). Other nations could point to outside enemies when their country was burned, but europe could not. The fundamental problem lies in the fact that europe was forced to look only at its relatively small faults, while other nations could emphasize their relatively smaller advantages in favor of their own faults which were greater than europe's by the nature of 'fighting against itself vs. an external enemy'.
Even considering how badly europe was wrecked by ww2, this cowardly and insipid ideological suicide of people who are taught to believe toughness is evil, what feels bad for them is bad, and life is about following your feelings
must be acknowledged as utter fantasy and reactionary nonsense. What life requires is not right and wrong based on your feelings and what comforts you - it's the strength to face anything with willingness to master them to bring about a better result.
