Introduction
For centuries, women have been the subject of systemic inequalities and injustices, resulting in their
marginalization and sluggish progress. Feminism as a theory and a movement endeavors to highlight
and abolish systemic inequalities and injustices perpetrated against women, relegating them as a
neglected faction of society despite their immense contributions to nation-building. Contrarily, this very
emancipatory agenda of feminism, to the dismay of many, can hamper the inclusivity and development
of women when coupled with the detested neo-imperial plan of action. Among many brands of
feminism, this mistake has been committed by white feminism, as its historical roots are entrenched in
the experiences and aspirations of white women. Subsequently, it is parochial, does not embrace an
intersectional approach, and is indifferent to other races. White feminism has failed to adopt an
intersectional approach to counter challenges faced by women of different ethnicities, races, and
backgrounds. Thereby, resulting in the continuation of neo-imperialism, which has further fortified the
subjugation of women. Similarly, neo-imperialism involves the dominance and exploitation of less
powerful nations by more powerful ones, often driven by economic and political motivations. Both
white feminism and neo-imperialism can reinforce existing power structures and fail to address the
complexities of intersectionality and global justice. Thus, the intermarriage of white feminism with neo-imperialism is feasible and lasting due to the mutual objectives – deepening the inequalities and
hierarchies. This article embarks on portraying the harmonious relationship between neo-imperialism
and white feminism and also how both share similar goals. Moreover, remedial measures can make
feminism more intersectional and intersectoral, helping it to deliver what it promised: to uplift women,
not to suppress women further.

Similarities between white feminism and neo-imperialism:
Feminism is a political and social movement, developed in waves throughout the 19th and 20th
centuries, that advocates for equality between men and women. The history of feminism comprises the
narratives of the movements and ideologies that have aimed at equal rights for women. Like any
theoretical framework, it has many strands, with white feminism as the earliest one, often confused as
universal and the only feminism type. On the face of it, white feminism was monumental in putting
forward the agenda of women's rights and also made satisfactory gains, but the in-depth analysis
reveals that it was exclusive – centering around middle-class white women. The scarce mention of
women of color, Asian women, and Caribbean women attracted criticism that not only undermines its
legitimacy but also its applicability as the universal model to solve the intersectional issues confronted
by women belonging to diverse backgrounds. Likewise, the theoretical metamorphosis of the theory
shows its glaring similarities with neo-imperialism - racial superiority, cultural dominance by being
detrimental to other indigenous people by not taking into consideration cultural realities, exacerbating
financial woes of developing nations by fostering capitalism as only pragmatic economic model. Thus,
deep-diving to know the complex interplay between w feminism and neo-imperialism is a worthy bet.
The critical discourses that help to analyze this relation are Gramscian theory and postcolonial feminism.
To begin with, the unyielding occupation of both the white race, to be precise the Caucasian race, as the
beacon of enlightenment is disturbing. The concept of white supremacy has been applied by both neo-imperialism and white feminism appropriately, with white feminism being one step ahead as it
completely excluded women belonging to diverse backgrounds. White feminism, as explained by Rafia
Zakaria, in her book, was represented by white middle-class women who thought, albeit wrongly, that
proposed solutions could amend the issues faced by women globally, thereby placing whiteness yet
again on top of the racial hierarchy. In the same manner that neo-imperialism fosters the ascendancy of
the white race, traversing across history, one knows that since time memorial white population has had
an unhealthy obsession with their race. Among the vast literature, white man's Burden- an ode to white
imperialism , deserves a special mention. This is a classic write up that embodies the white
supremacists' thinking and how white people should march globally to civilize the other so-called savage
races. Moving on next, after racial prejudices, both neo-imperialism and white feminism seek to impose
cultural dominance of the West, thus increasing the chasm between the global north and South. Both ,
white feminism and neo-imperialism deliberately direct efforts to westernize the whole world so that no
other civilization is left to challenge Western civilization. This case has been put forward in The Clash of
Civilizations by Samuel Huntington; he espoused in his book that future wars will be among civilizationsthis thesis led western countries go berserk also enhancing the mass imposition of Western culture in a
bid to win these cultural wars. According to Antonio Gramsci, this is a cultural hegemony, a
phenomenon where the former colonizer continues its legacy even without its physical presence in
erstwhile colonies. Furthermore, another commonality between neo-imperialism and white feminism is
its exploitative nature; both under the garb of development as aided by capitalism exploit women; the
route of exploitation- most favored and least risky, is the rise of multinational corporations(MNCS) that
control cheap labor and plunder away the natural resources of indigenous nations. Conclusively, both
white feminism and neo-imperialism aim at foisting and sustaining the status quo that is
disadvantageous in significant proportion to the groups who already have fallen to neglect.

Ways in which feminism endeavors to further the agenda of neoimperialism:
White feminism's toolset includes a variety of instruments that, while differing in their methods of
operation, all serve to further neo-imperialism, which is detrimental to already suffering and weak
groups. The very first tool white feminism uses is the Westernization of Non-governmental organizations
(NGOs), a medium through which it seems to execute its course of action.Many studies have shown that
these Ngos indulge in the cultural onslaught of the native countries by discouraging the cultural artifacts
and requisitions of religious symbols, such as the removal of the veil, portrayed as a sign of
liberation.Thus, the NGOs empower women, but in reality, they export an imperialistic agenda by
spreading the culture of the former colonizer countries and disregarding native culture. Since many
women's NGOs in the third world are informed by Western cultural feminism, they tend to view women
as biologically or psychologically less competitive and more risk-averse and, therefore, in need of extra
help in the form of training programs and micro-credit schemes. Many women's NGOs have become
distributors of Western ideas about gender by taking away the agency of self-expression of the
indigenous cultures, which also makes them porous to absorb the dominant culture of the hegemon.
This phenomenon, also referred to by postcolonial feminists as missionary feminism, furthers
imperialism because, at its core, it is underpinned by an Enlightenment ethos. It takes Western cultural
forms as the only viable and morally just scenarios while framing all other women as prisoners of their
own 'culture' – that is, traditions and rituals that are, in turn, assumed absent in the modern and
progressive West. Consequently, the traditions and religions of such cultures are viewed as the impetus
for women's subordination.Furthermore, white feminism is masqueraded as an omnipotent protector of
women against the oppression and tyranny of their rulers. The prime example of missionary feminism at
play is the instigation of the Afghanistan war by feminists to detangle women from the clutches of
repression. This obnoxious act was partly endorsed by famous white feminists from the US such as
Gloria Steinem and Hollywood actors Susan Sarandon and Meryl Streep, who signed letters that
promised to liberate Afghan women from the Taliban. The theft of feminist rhetoric to facilitate
expansion by the then serving United States premiers to wage war, and its support among white
feminists not only attracted fury but also contributed to the growing distastefor white feminism.
Secondly, another instrument of white feminism to promote neo-imperialism is the disregard and
belittling of other races via social and mainstream media; the women of color are portrayed as someone
desperate to be rescued by white women, and one such incident backs this argument in much plausible
manner, social activists seek to highlight the high handedness of white women who look down upon the
other races. This racial superiority runs smoothly and uninterrupted in the former colonial powers also
in modern times, these powers try to establish themselves as predominant players in the global arena
,white feminism accelerates this goal amazingly and actively. Thirdly, white feminism in the economic
domain pays its service where it has crafted a well-curated image of independent women working in the
corporate sector only. The concept is referred to as Corporate feminism - a sub-branch of white
feminism that serves as a smokescreen for international government organizations(IGOs) and
Multinational corporations (MNCs) actions and policies that are antithetical to women's progress
.According to a women activist, the corporate girl archetype no only views with contempt the other
professions adopted by women but is also emotionally taxing to white women as the incorporation
approach does not eliminate the glass ceiling but merely works as a ladder to climb it.Additionally, Big
corporations and structural inequality are entangled in a symbiotic relationship that will never be
addressed by individual women, filling the molds of the men before them. Feminism should challenge
this inequality at its roots rather than change its figureheads. That depiction of a corporate girl as
liberated and self-sufficient is a scam, and under the facade of this, the women serve as a repository of
cheap labor. This very aim is in favor of neo-imperialism, which gets easy access to an underpaid
workforce.The real issues in terms of employment are not significantly addressed by white feminism,
such as the cuts to legal aid, which have a disproportionate impact on women, and the fact that we are
over-represented in low-paid service industries or unpaid domestic work. While wealthy employed
women may face challenges in joining elite private members' clubs, their plight is relatively minor
compared to these more pressing issues. According to Koa Beck, journalist and author of the new book
White Feminism, the ideology and strategy of white feminism "focuses more on individual
accumulation, capital, and individuality. Similarly, it strengthens MNCs, pawns of capitalism that abuse
women by paying them peanuts in exchange for hefty labor. Similarly, IGOs, in the pretext of
development, call for streamlining the liberal global order and calls for the whiteness of local
development policies. once again, works in glove with the neo-imperialistic design; the development
policies are also tilted in favor of northern women. In the South, women are given crumbs of the
development programs project; one such research worth mentioning is by Hilary Campbell, how IMF
under the development programs deprive women of the already meager resources and barely sufficient
social welfare facilities, thereby proving white feminism works in tandem with neo-imperialism making
it nefarious in aims and myopic in approach.

Making feminism more inclusive and intersectional to counter neo-imperialism
Intersectionality is a theoretical framework developed by women-of-color feminists to articulate the
specific experiences and challenges faced by women of color. These challenges often involve
intersecting systems of oppression, including racism, sexism, classism, and heterosexism, which are
often overlooked by single-axis theories. Although the term 'intersectionality' was coined by Kimberlé
Crenshaw in 1989, many intersectionality theorists ground their framework in the nineteenth-century
writings of black women such as Sojourner Truth, Anna Julia Cooper, and others, who sought to describe
the exclusions and oppressions faced by black women on account of their gender and
race. Intersectionality theory continued to be developed throughout the twentieth century by theorists
who variously identified themselves as black womanists, black feminists, Chicana feminists, hispanas,
and xian-sister/outsiders. At its core, intersectionality theory posits that social systems of domination
are mutually constructed and reinforce each other, shaping the experiences of individuals who are
marginalized by these systems. Accordingly, to understand and address these systems, it is necessary to
consider them together rather than as separate entities.Using an intersectional lens also entails
recognizing the historical contexts surrounding an issue. Historical injustices, including violence and
systematic discrimination, have contributed to deep-rooted inequities that disadvantage some
individuals from the outset. These inequities intersect with each other, such as poverty, caste systems,
racism, and sexism, which deny people their rights and equal opportunities, with impacts that extend
across generations.Today, countries and communities around the world are facing multiple and
interconnected threats. While the specific issues may vary, they share the effect of magnifying preexisting needs, such as housing, food, education, care, employment, and protection. Nevertheless, crisis
responses often fail to protect the most vulnerable, fragmenting efforts rather than unifying them. By
taking on board the experiences and challenges different groups face, we can better understand the
issues and find solutions that work for all.Looking through an intersectional feminist lens, we can see
how different communities are battling various interconnected issues simultaneously. Standing in
solidarity with one another, questioning power structures, and speaking out against the root causes of
inequalities are critical actions for building a future that leaves no one behind. Crises lay bare the
structural inequalities that shape our lives and are opportunities to effect extensive resets – catalysts for
rebuilding societies that offer justice and safety to everyone. Rather than returning to business as usual,
we can use crises to redefine 'normal.'

Concluding remarks
summing it up, the bonhomie between white feminism and neo-imperialism is not just reprehensible
but calls for remedial actions. White feminism, for all the rights reasons, has not got the seal of approval
as a globally reckoned and accepted blueprint for eradication of women's plight as it ostensibly
safeguards the right of women but amplify neo-imperialism. Consequently, it fondly works with the
same oppressive system it seeks, or at least alleges, to dismantle. .Feminism by no means should
support any ideology that historically and at its core is narrow and oppressive. It calls for embracing a
comprehensive and inclusive approach to feminism- an intersectional approach that considers the
unique challenges faced by women from diverse backgrounds and works to create a movement that is
broad and all-encompassing. By doing so, we can ensure that feminism remains relevant and effective in
promoting gender equality and uplifting women while avoiding the pitfalls of neo-imperialism and
narrow-mindedness. Hence ,Intersectional feminism has the potential to serve as an outlet for women
to display their grievances and inadequacies regardless of their culture and race.