> colonialism requires forced intervention

According to who?

Can I recommend a work by a certain Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, that was concerned with this exact mechanism and described it in detail?

Let me know if any of this sounds at all relevant to the situation we find ourselves in:

> For capitalism to generate greater profits than the home market can yield, the merging of banks and industrial cartels produces finance capitalism, and the exportation and investment of capital to countries with undeveloped and underdeveloped economies. In turn, that financial behaviour divides the world among monopolist business companies. In colonizing undeveloped countries, business and government will engage in geopolitical conflict over the exploitation of labour of most of the population of the world.

> Therefore, imperialism is the highest (advanced) stage of capitalism, requiring monopolies to exploit labour and natural resources, and the exportation of finance capital, rather than manufactured goods, to sustain colonialism, which is an integral function of imperialism.

> Moreover, in the capitalist homeland, the super-profits yielded by the colonial exploitation of a people and their economy permit businessmen to bribe native politicians, labour leaders and the labour aristocracy (upper stratum of the working class) to politically thwart worker revolt (labour strike) and placate the working class.

This was Wikipedia's tl; dr of "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism"

Here's more if that sounded elucidating: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperialism,_the_Highest_Stage...

For some reason neither of those bad things prevented Lenin and his successors to oppress their own people.

You left out "choice" part. And you confused capitalism with colonialism.

If you did that on purpose, you brought up whataboutism.

- I aint playing your game diverting attention from my comment.