The correct view that liberal (in the classical sense) values gave the world unprecedented freedom, wealth, and health, is dismissed by anti-West westerners with the claim that it was all built on exploitation. Of course there has been exploitation in the world, but this has held the West back more than helped it. And there was even more exploitation in the rest of the world. The Aztecs had slaves, as did most societies. It was the West that pushed to end slavery--with naval power in the case of England in the 1800s.
People's true beliefs can be found by how they act. None of these people take the step of moving to North Korea or Venezuela--they just go their for a selfie and to pat themselves on the back.

The vital achievement of the West was the concept of individual rights, which saw its birth with the Magna Carta in 1215. The idea emerged that individuals have certain inalienable rights. Individuals do not exist to serve government; governments exist to protect their rights.

To borrow from Monty Python: And now for something completely different...

The Islamist perspective, courtesy (once again) of Paul Berman's article about Sayyid Qutb:

Qutb's vanguard was going to reinstate shariah, the Muslim code, as the legal code for all of society. . . . Shariah, in his view, meant liberation. Other societies, drawing on non-Koranic principles, forced people to obey haughty masters and man-made law. Those other societies forced people to worship their own rulers and to do as the rulers said -- even if the rulers were democratically chosen. Under shariah, no one was going to be forced to obey mere humans. Shariah, in Qutb's view, meant "the abolition of man-made laws." In the resurrected caliphate, every person was going to be "free from servitude to others." The true Islamic system meant "the complete and true freedom of every person and the full dignity of every individual of the society. On the other hand, in a society in which some people are lords who legislate and some others are slaves who obey, then there is no freedom in the real sense, nor dignity for each and every individual."

He insisted that shariah meant freedom of conscience -- though freedom of conscience, in his interpretation, meant freedom from false doctrines that failed to recognize God, freedom from the modern schizophrenia. Shariah, in a word, was utopia for Sayyid Qutb. It was perfection. It was the natural order in the universal. It was freedom, justice, humanity and divinity in a single system. It was a vision as grand or grander than Communism or any of the other totalitarian doctrines of the 20th century. It was, in his words, "the total liberation of man from enslavement by others."

In a nice bit of serendipity, I was cruising around the NYTimes website and noticed this piece: Letter From Austria: Is Europe’s ‘Tolerant Society’ Backfiring?

But this more stringent control of the content of political expression in Europe may lead to unintended consequences. European legal systems are empowered to select for permitted expression on the basis of how liberal or illiberal it is. This leads to the paradox of an institutional intolerance toward beliefs and practices that are seen as intolerant, a conundrum summed up by Stanley Fish when he argued that true multiculturalism is impossible because the mandate to tolerate others’ cultures will always founder on those cultures’ own intolerance.

If we really wanted to do something, we would stop Islamic immigration NOW!

Paul Weston went off on pro-Muslim politicians and it was EPIC

Yes, that's the inherent contradiction. To rephrase Fish, all cultures are equal, except for Western culture which is inferior to all the others.

"ask a diversity/multiculturalism advocate: Is forcible female genital mutilation, as practiced in nearly 30 sub-Saharan African and Middle Eastern countries, a morally equivalent cultural value?"

They'll respond by trying to deflect the question. This will usually take the form of equivocating some relatively minor (or even totally imaginary) Western offense against women: "Well, in Western culture, menopausal women have to make co-pays on their hormone treatments! So there!" This is classic Cluster B behavior. Leftism is just the Cluster B personality disorders rendered as politics. Keep that in mind the next time you hear an SJW rant.