No? Imperialism is as I already laid out for you, a process by which the global north, dominated by monopoly finance capital, exports capital to the global south to super-exploit foreign labor for super-profits. Luxembourg's role in that international system is as a foreign tax haven for the imperialists.

[+] masterflappie@europe.pub -7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

imperialism, state policy, practice, or advocacy of extending power and dominion, especially by direct territorial acquisition or by gaining political and economic control of other areas.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/imperialism

You know you can just look up these thing right?

Not taxing your citizens, is not imperialism. Luxembourg is not an imperialist country.

The process that you're describing is called free trade. As soon as the global south doesn't want to partake in this trade, they can stop. And Luxembourg wouldn't have anything to say on that matter.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 days ago

Yes, I'm aware of britannica's over-simplified, useless, liberal definition. It reduces imperialism from a well-understood phenomenon with explainable causes, mechanics, and weaknesses, into a vague, vibes-based definition about "influence." All countries influence each other for their own gain, that doesn't make them imperialist.

Luxemburg is a tax haven for foreign capital, Walmart used it to dodge billions in taxes despite not having a real presence there. The citizens of Luxemburg benefit from foreign capitalists using it to dodge taxes, and in this way participate and benefit from imperialism. You're right about one thing, it is a consequence of free trade, which is why free trade is bad.

You think that by changing the name of a thing that you've changed its nature.