I am... not sure about your grasp on the term "imperialism" here.
You hail English as "able to give the underprivileged greater opportunities". But the reason for that is that English is more widely spread, and dominant in the most wealthy areas. Which is... well... imperialism.
It sounds like you're simply dismissing Esperanto as a niche hobby for a handful of white nerds. Which, in terms of practical benefit, might well be accurate. But it is BIZARRE to invert the definition of imperialism to over-state this point.
You hail English as "able to give the underprivileged greater opportunities". But the reason for that is that English is more widely spread, and dominant in the most wealthy areas. Which is... well... imperialism.
It sounds like you're simply dismissing Esperanto as a niche hobby for a handful of white nerds. Which, in terms of practical benefit, might well be accurate. But it is BIZARRE to invert the definition of imperialism to over-state this point.