The left thinks western capitalist democracy is basically flawed, and is always in search of some kind of revolutionary “change” that will make everything right. As a result, the left has a history of getting excited about romantic foreign leaders and third-world “rebels”.
The right, in contrast, thinks the answers to how to order society lie in the Western Enlightenment and were basically worked out in the 17th-18th centuries. As a result, the right has little interest in new “revolutionary” ideas, especially ones from outside the West. The right is largely unimpressed with the non-western world. In fact, the right seldom gets excited about foreigners at all, especially if they are non-westerners or third-world people.
The predictable result of these differences is that the left has a far more embarrassing track record of supporting foreign tyranny than the right. And because of these differences, this track record is likely to continue (see for example the recent left-wing enthusiasm for the butchers of the Iraqi resistance). This page lays out some of the shocking (and not widely-enough known) expressions of support from comfortable western intellectuals (mostly left-wing or left-leaning) for foreign tyrannies they would never live under themselves.
The western left has a long history of supporting third world tyranny that they would never live under themselves.
Shown here is how many western leftists still consider people like Che Guevara and Mao cool in some way.