• eskimofry@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      10 months ago

      Over a hunderd years ago… but I get the point. Also not the OP you were replying to before.

    • squirmy_wormy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      10 months ago

      No it isn’t. That is corporatocracy. Imperialism is a policy of extending a country’s power and influence through diplomacy or military force.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Let me get this right.

        You don’t think the British East Indian Company’s conquest of India was imperialism either?

        Because it wasn’t technically the state doing it.

          • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            10 months ago

            You know what, I deserve this conversation. I’ve trolled people with “It can’t be imperialism because we’re a republic” before, this is just karma.

            On the off chance that you’re not just trolling, no, it isn’t, because your definition sucks and is deliberately limited so you can be a pedantic yet incorrect twat about some of history’s greatest crimes.

            • squirmy_wormy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              No I’m not being a troll. And it’s not my definition, it’s the actual meaning of the word. Words - especially when used in emotionally charged contexts - have meaning and when they are misused to make a nice little sound bite, it dilutes the power they have. I don’t like when people do that.