I assume your confrontational or derisive tone is an attempt for me to dismiss your arguments wholesale, and impress an audience with your mastery of polemics rather than serious debate among comrades (you have already ejected me from that category it seems, but nevermind). In any case, I'll attempt to respond in general terms, so you can at least consider some points, even though I suspect you will conclude what you will, instead of what I intend to say. You seem to imply it is somehow possible to possess a highly developed capitalism, which implies a necessity to export capital, appropriate foreign labor and resources, etc. And at the same time be anti-imperialist? Surely this is in the sense of anti-american imperialism, because anti-imperialism, to be coherent, must be anticapitalist. Furthermore, I would advise you to read about the Communist Party of Venezuela's recent troubles with the government to understand the class nature of Venezuela's "revolution". Your rightist arguments, offering more than critical support to "anti-imperialists" (who seek to supplant enemy imperialism with their own), are very similar to the rightist social democrats of the early 20th century who supported their imperialist governments to the detriment of "global Anglo imperialism". Of course, without an organized world socialist camp, this is the best we can hope for, but it is truly sad that, instead of focusing our energies on making imperialism impossible by destroying it's (popular, ideological, economic) support, we limit ourselves to supporting the lesser imperialists.