Not attaching another country that is exploiting neocolonialism is not the same as supporting: it is tolerating an abuse.

That is a distinction without a material difference. If your economy runs on cheap resources secured by French military bases, and your banks profit from CFA franc transactions, and your corporations get preferential access through EU trade deals shaped in Paris and Brussels, you are not "tolerating" anything. You are benefiting. That is support.

The West is rich because it developed a highly productive, technology advanced, well-governed domestic economy. Germany was one of the strongest industrial economy by 1880 without a single colony.

This is propaganda slop. Germany industrialized on cotton from colonized Africa, rubber from the Congo, minerals from occupied territories. Its banks financed colonial ventures. Its firms sold into colonial markets protected by British and French guns. Italy likewise. No direct colonies does not mean no colonial benefit. The entire European system was integrated. Extraction in the periphery subsidized accumulation in the core. That is the material record.

If a german company is providing capital, jobs and infrastructure to a developing country via foreign direct investment is it neocolonial extraction for you?

When that investment secures resource access, repatriates profits, shapes local policy to favor foreign capital, and leaves the host economy dependent, yes. That is the form extraction takes now. It does not need flags or governors.

What exactly is the neocolonial extraction of Spain for example? Are we talking bought assets of telephone companies and banks in latin America?

Yes. Exactly that. Spanish banks and telecoms dominate markets in Latin America not because of superior efficiency, but because of historical ties, language, and financial structures that replicate colonial patterns. Capital flows one way. Profits flow back. Local development stays constrained.

You are not wrong that powerful countries impose themselves. But that power was built on centuries of extraction. To pretend the West got rich by being smarter, better governed, or more innovative while ignoring the enslaved labor, stolen land, and plundered resources that funded that rise is either naive (the irony) or dishonest.

I know you'll likely call me a tankie or use some other thought terminating cliche to dismiss this but you really should read Lenin, Fanon [expand with 3-4 more Marxist and colonial scholars]