The point is not "criticism of XYZ". The issue is asking questions to an LLM like a catholic priest interrogates a heathen. Bad faith questions are those that seek to confirm one's own worldview instead understanding another worldview. Bad faith attitudes are those that dismiss other worldviews completely and out of hand.
There’s also the issue that practically nobody actually uses LLMs to criticize political entity XYZ. Let's face it, the vast majority of use cases are somewhere else, yet a tiny minority is pretending like the LLM not giving them the responses they want for their political agenda is the only thing that matters. When it comes to censorship areas that matter to most use cases, many people have found that many Chinese LLMs do better than western LLMs simply because most use cases never touch Chinese political stuff. See thorough discussions by @levelsio and his followers on Twitter on this matter.
That's a very niche use case compared to the majority. Also, opposition research has got nothing to do with "I asked about [political event] and it refused to answer" kind of complaint. Opposition researchers don't ask LLMs about Tiananmen or whatever. The latter kind of queries are still just testing censorship boundaries as a form of virtue signaling or ideological theater, to make some rhetorical point that's completely decoupled from the vast majority of practical use cases.
