aggression with an expansionist agenda.

especially by a country and especially unprovoked.

Economically or militarily.

D-day wouldn’t be included because the goal wasn’t expansion. Though I would be very surprised if the usa and Europe hadn’t perpetrated many acts that should be included during the full course of the war.

And of course you can get into the argument of cultural imperialism as well

The Marxist definition is strictly different, not a clarification. The Marxist one posits only capitalism can be imperialist, something I would say is strictly incorrect

Marxist does not get to exclusively define what imperialism is. A more standard definition is far more reasonable to use. However, your comment is very informative to me, I’m glad you took the time to write this out

No goalposts have moved dude

Ok but the person above just denied that a square was a rectangle

Nato is not a risk to russia, and never has been. Nato is a defensive alliance. The only way they’re a risk is if russia plans to attack them first. Anyone suggesting that nato provoked it is on something

Invading for territory gain is absolutely synonymous with imperialistic tendencies

Russia isn’t imperialist

Why do you think they’re invading Ukraine. Sparkles and rainbows?

That’s a funny fantasy world.

Pretty sure I’ve been temp banned from ml like a dozen times or something. Who knows the exact amount. They’re generous with bans but apparently a perm is rarer

They got a whole hell of a lot more than “some” and your metaphor is ridiculously over simplified and not applicable

Absolutely not. It’s not a one way street, Israel is exerting large amounts of bribes and influence to push the states in such a way

Yes. But that’s not perpetrated by the states, especially not with how many nations support Israel, so it is not correct to call it a genocide by the states

The only differenc

e now is that white people aren’t insulated, so now it’s fascism.

White people are still insulated from the consequences. Also, genocide and mass murder do not require fascism. You’re mistaking every horrible thing to be equivalent to fascism, when in reality democracies can and do still perpetrate such horrors. Mass murder on a foreign country is horrific, and wrong, but that does not automatically make it fascist.

Israel is a US puppet state

With how much they control USA politics, that is blatantly false.

The mask is off.

The degree is different. You think the banning of lgbtq and immigration is the same as before you’re crazy

Literally, no. Trump is a substantial change. Yes, the usa historically has had a massive amount of problems. Trump is not same old but said allowed, he’s a new level of psychotic and demented fascism. The previous stuff was what laid the foundation for a full on fascist to come to power.

the genocide already ongoing.

There was no genocide perpetrated by the states prior to trump in the last 20 years. Gaza, if that’s what you mean, while supported far too much by the states is done by Israel.

The degree is different.

Nah I love silly stupid corners. Put a roller shelf in it.

Saying that when trump is bringing about fascism is ironic.

Humanity is on a hard fought, slow, and with many setbacks, trend towards a better world. Evil is pushed out by good but not without the blood, sweat, and tears of many good people.

The fact that you linked 3 links that don’t counter what I said is impressive.

You can’t form a corporation without their expressed permission, if not, you loose your status as a corporation.

This is just wrong. It’s not permission. You submit to their bureaucracy, yes, but that’s guaranteed if you submit your paperwork correctly, it’s not a permission.

Capitalism ≠ Laissez-faire free markets, but government owning the rights on who gets to issue bonds and debts.

This is not completely accurate. It implies it’s a prior approval situation instead of a post-revocable situation which while similar are notably different. The government cannot revoke those privileges arbitrarily. There is rules for them, but those rules do not restrict who does so, they restrict how it’s done.

Speaking broadly, a system where the king issues money, and controls said money, is not capitalism anymore than socialism is communism. When nobility exist and can arbitrarily set rules and taxes, that is not capitalism. That isn’t to say either are good, they’re both terrible systems. But the thing you described with a king is strictly not capitalism, it’s a different evil.