> There's a tendency of certain Westerners to consider the myths of others are being more legitimate
I've always considered this is a subtle form of othering in which the cultural left indulges.[1] It's really unfortunate and no less alienating than more obvious forms of othering.
A related phenomenon is the left (as well as non-religious more generally, not all firmly steeped in the leftist milieu) feeling entitled to criticize or diminish otherwise similar religious practices found within the dominant culture they were raised. Standing alone it would fit into a millennia-long vein of intellectual discourse in the West[2], however in contrast to the noble savage gloss given non-Western cultures it becomes intolerably hypocritical.
[1] Relatedly, for years I've considered figurative use of words like "legitimate" and, especially, "authentic" as signaling and reflecting dubious modern cultural value judgments. These modern cultural concepts have been internalized across the political and cultural spectrum in the West, especially the rich West. Learning to spot this language is a good way to identify B.S. in politics, philosophy, business, marketing, and almost every other area of life. (Conversely, when you're feeling evil you can use these words to great profit in rhetoric.) In this case I understand you're deliberately echoing others' verbiage.
As a person who generally identifies as being on the US left, I took it as a factual use of the term, not a personal gripe or ideological battle. To the extent I can even think of people on the "right" doing the equivalent with indigenous cultures, it's in a completely different manner.
I’m not even getting into the accuracy or lack of accuracy of the statement.
Due to the numbers of viewers, if even a fraction of people start posting whatever gripe about left/right that comes to their mind after each comment like here, then this place will be unbearable. Hence the guideline admonishing against that.
Well when put like that, sounds like a terrible conversation piece for socials events, particularly when an 1/3 to 2/3rds belong to the group being griped about. Especially when the gripee is seemingly not even part of that group.
It’s like standing in a group talking and then going: “hey this topic reminds me about how a third of you people, which I’m not one of, do this and this bad thing, isn’t that annoying?! Haha you people”
I think you are right that there is a danger for the left to be biased in this way. Just like there is a strong bias on the right to selectively pick what was part of the "good old times" up to the point where the whole idea becomes complete fiction.
If we engage in a little bit of theological scholarship then it becomes clear why the trust in our own myths can sometimes be low. In the history of Christianity there has been so much political maneuvering and power play involved in the way these myths ought to be told or not told that most people question any truth those myths could hold purely on that fact alone. Then you also have devout Christians who would probably call Jesus if he was reborn today and said precisely what he said in the bible a socialist. So if the long history of the church and its religous wars didn't scare you off, the "Christian Love" of the loudest believers might just do the trick.
With other cultures we don't know all that political bullshit and scheming which mind lurk behind their myth, so we have a different, less negative look at it.
> entitled to criticize or diminish otherwise similar religious practices found within the dominant culture they were raised
Its amazing how the right(or the religious more generally) feel entitled to diminish the self-agency and self-ownership of people who live in the same state as them because they fell they dominate and own the culture that "raises" those people. It reminds me of the certain ideologies that sees the whole chinese diaspora as some how being property of the PRC.
I've always considered this is a subtle form of othering in which the cultural left indulges.[1] It's really unfortunate and no less alienating than more obvious forms of othering.
A related phenomenon is the left (as well as non-religious more generally, not all firmly steeped in the leftist milieu) feeling entitled to criticize or diminish otherwise similar religious practices found within the dominant culture they were raised. Standing alone it would fit into a millennia-long vein of intellectual discourse in the West[2], however in contrast to the noble savage gloss given non-Western cultures it becomes intolerably hypocritical.
[1] Relatedly, for years I've considered figurative use of words like "legitimate" and, especially, "authentic" as signaling and reflecting dubious modern cultural value judgments. These modern cultural concepts have been internalized across the political and cultural spectrum in the West, especially the rich West. Learning to spot this language is a good way to identify B.S. in politics, philosophy, business, marketing, and almost every other area of life. (Conversely, when you're feeling evil you can use these words to great profit in rhetoric.) In this case I understand you're deliberately echoing others' verbiage.
[2] See, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucian, but such religious skepticism and satire goes back much further.