Imperialism, which involves a country taking control of other lands for its own benefit, is not a necessary part of capitalism. In capitalism, businesses aim to make profits. While some capitalists may think expanding into new markets is important, others don’t agree. There are many capitalist countries, like Canada or Japan, that don’t use imperialism to grow. They just trade, create new things, and invest without forcing other countries to do what they want. Plus, there are rules to keep companies from getting too big and unfair. Some companies even care more about being good to people and the planet than making lots of money. Nowadays, companies can grow by working with other countries, not by taking them over. Overall, while history shows that sometimes capitalism uses imperialism, it doesn’t have to. There are lots of ways to succeed in capitalism without needing to be “mean” to others. Imperialism specifically means the state, actively expanding territory for benefit of the state. If the state is not the one doing it it's not imperialism. Benefiting from imperialism, is not the same thing as doing imperialism. By saying it's not imperialism, I am not condoning the action I am simply saying the definition doesn't match how it's used in modernity. We have different words for companies exploiting 3rd world labor none of which are imperialism.
