Ask Lemmygrad

The crux of your criticism seems to be claiming that China has prioritized its own interests at the cost of the international working class, but your closing statement contradicts this outright. If the most important goal is the proletarian revolution, then it stands to reason that the most important action on China's part is developing and reinforcing the revolution that they do have (rather than a hypothetical one in another country that they don't have), and that if anything, the USSR fell because it tried to do too much in other countries and prioritized its internal state too little.

There are other points we could go over, but that seems to be the most pressing.

Other points:

It abandoned class analysis

Pure nonsense that does not hold up to scrutiny.

Examples include the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, the FNLA in Angola, and trying to get North Vietnam to capitulate to a ceasefire leaving a divided country like Korea during the Vietnam War.

The USSR also made geopolitical blunders and misjudgements in post-WWII. A mistake is not the same thing as being revisionist.

China began collaborating with the US. Against the USSR in many cases.

rather than unite against imperialism and capitalist exploitation, they facilitated it in many ways.

Citations desperately needed. Again, this is little different than saying allied with. It is also in contradiction with implying that China prioritized its own interests, as allying with imperialism would not further its interests.

Were China an ally of imperialism, it would be praised by the empire, not vilified constantly. It is precisely because China is a threat to the empire that it gets vilified from both left and right, in ongoing attempts to reduce it to nothing more than a caricature of "power gone wrong", whether from the perspective of "evil commies" or "used to be commie and got lost to revisionism". This reductionist perspective is two sides of the same shitty coin.

It is tiresome, this song and dance about how China (or any socialist project) should bend over backward to support any and all revolutionary efforts in other countries, but at the same time, imply that those efforts are justified in throwing it under the bus as being revisionist if it doesn't support them in particular, especially in the precise way that they want. China is not a superhero. It is a complex entity made up of over a billion people. It's not a savior or villain. It's neither revisionist nor is it without fault. When it comes to difficult decisions on the global stage, there is plenty of blame to go around and in recent history (recent as in last hundreds of years or so), most of that blame lands squarely on the shoulders of colonialism and its development into imperialism. Something China has staunchly avoided engaging in, no matter the accusations that get levied its way (for example, the claims pushed by the empire itself that China is bad for helping other countries develop infrastructure, as if that's inherently the same as making them a dependent) and China was even a victim of colonialism when dealing with Japan's aggression. The least people can do is give them credit for not being another arm of genociding humankind.