Gee, now I see why libs don’t see the US and Europe as imperialist. They use a definition where they dont fall into

Using Britannica 's definition of Fascism is like using the Klan’s definition of racism.

Here’s the actual definition, which doesn’t fit modern Russia at all, but does fit neatly onto the US and most of the EU.

Imperialism is capitalism at that stage of development at which the dominance of monopolies and finance capital is established; in which the export of capital has acquired pronounced importance; in which the division of the world among the international trusts has begun, in which the division of all territories of the globe among the biggest capitalist powers has been completed.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/ch07.htm

Bonus excerpt of Lenin calling out Kautsky for doing exactly what you’re doing with the definition:

This definition is of no use at all because it one-sidedly, i.e., arbitrarily, singles out only the national question (although the latter is extremely important in itself as well as in its relation to imperialism), it arbitrarily and inaccurately connects this question only with industrial capital in the countries which annex other nations, and in an equally arbitrary and inaccurate manner pushes into the forefront the annexation of agrarian regions.

Facts are evil, how dare you use a dictionary. Dictionaries are woke western!