....and they are welcoming insecurity and exploitation by Russia. Prigozhin wasn't there because he gave a shit about those people. He was there to exploit them.

[–] freagle@lemmygrad.ml -5 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Whataboutism and projection. You can't just say "but what about Russia" when people are fighting against North Atlantic imperialism. This article is about North Atlantic imperialism. Mentioning Russian so-called imperialism is whataboutism.

Also, Russia isn't doing imperialism because it in no way meets the definition of imperialim. It's economy is smaller than Brazil's and smaller than South Korea's. 60% of its exports are raw materials or intermediate materials. India exports 3 times more capital than Russia does. Clearly South Korea and India aren't imperialist. Russia isn't either.

[–] tex@czech-lemmy.eu 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

What is connection between size of economy and imperialism?

[–] freagle@lemmygrad.ml -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Imperialism is:

Monopoly capitalism
Export of finance capital as primary
dividing up the world amongst other finance capitalists

Korea, Brazil, and India are in no position to be imperialist. They are countries exploited by the imperialist bloc. Russia is even smaller than these countries and is even more exploited. It literally does not fit the definition of imperialism.

[–] NotSpez@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I feel like that’s a wrong definition, here is one more broadly used:

imperialism | IM'pIerIalIz(a)m | noun [mass noun] a policy of extending a country's power and influence through colonization, use of military force, or other means

So the use of military (Wagner) force also constitutes it. Also, the size of that country has nothing to do with it.

load more comments (4 replies)