this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2025
38 points (91.3% liked)
Asklemmy
52048 readers
385 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Iceland?
Though prices are high in Iceland. Their wages are also high, which offsets that, but if you're coming in with foreign currency/income, you'll feel the prices more...
Love the Nordics if Iceland counts!
Iceland is imperialist, though, and is decaying.
Which imperialist things do they do nowadays? Being founded on imperialism isn't the same as doing the imperialism, mind.
Iceland participates in the ongoing system by which the global north plunders the global south. It's of course a NATO country, and participates in unequal exchange. Iceland isn't especially imperialist, just like, say, Texas isn't especially imperialist, just that these are both participants in a broader system of imperialism.
Ah, I see. I wouldn't count supporting/enabling/allowing war and famine instead of actively pursuing war and famine in other parts of the world and doing Euro-centric policy with exploiting the other countries plain imperialism per se. It may be cultural imperialism which I'd separate from the "traditional" imperialism by hard power.
I see where you're coming from and I think how Europe treats other countries often lacks any kind of empathy, consideration or equality, but again, wouldn't call it imperialism to not mud the waters.
See my other response regarding Germany's very real participation in full, ecomomic plunder-style imperialism:
I'm calling it imperialism precisely to not muddy the waters. Economic imperialism is how the west functions, past and present, and this is due to the dominance of finance capital and unequal exchange. The idea that imperialism was a thing of the past, and that Germany today runs largely on its own production and not the economic plunder it continues to extract (along with the west collectively) is fundamentally incorrect.
Understood, but I disagree and maintain that this form of globalised exploitation and unequal exchange is not the same as imperialism. It can be argued that it's economic imperialism but I think that's also not quite the right term if the other criteria of economic imperialism aren't met.
What "other criteria" are you referring to, here? Why isn't this imperialism proper?
Taking control of the legislative, executive or judicative, for example.
Those are some of the measures by which imperialism is maintained, not imperialism outright.
Then how do you define imperialism? What criteria need to be met exactly?
Please make it a simple list instead of an essay.
The very basic and simplified features of imperialism are as follows:
The presence of monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life.
The merging of bank capital with industrial capital into finance capital controlled by a financial oligarchy.
The export of capital as distinguished from the simple export of commodities.
The formation of international monopolist capitalist associations (cartels) and multinational corporations.
The domination and exploitation of other countries by militaristic imperialist powers, now through neocolonialism.
The territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers.
This is of course generalized, and each individual country's role in imperialism/anti-imperialism is going to fulfill different manifestations of this. For example, the US Empire is the hegemon, with Europe and the collective "west" vassalized post-WWII.
Thank you, I see where your definition differs from mine ๐
Does it say they don't want an imperialist nation?
"Equal and Just" to me means they aren't participating in imperialism or unequal exchange.