So here is my dilemma. We import all food and goods, too small for agriculture. Our main economy is built on financial services and tourism mostly. Our social safety net and most of our let's say, liberal left leaning policies are being eroded as time goes by, which is not ideal, but is still better than nothing I guess.
However, since we trade our service based economy for essentially everything else, how does socialism help a nation so dependent on the world around it being capitalist to survive?
Does this mean that Norway is by your definition a neocolony?
Norway is a big country. The topic was microstates. Basically anything smaller than Luxemburg is not viable as an independent state. Though i would make an exception for island nations with enough territorial waters to feed their population and have a viable economic basis despite their small landmass.
What makes Luxembourg specifically the lower limit of area for a viable country? If it is that a country smaller than Luxembourg cannot feed its current population using only the resources of its land and territorial waters, then my point is that there are also countries way bigger than Luxembourg for which this is also the case -- but you could not call these countries microstates or neocolonies with a straight face.