Why did England not become fascist?
Without them being part of the allies Hitler could have defeated Russia. Even neutrality would probably have sufficed.
Was becoming Americas lapdog really preferable to being an equal partner of the Reich? With the Reich's help it would have been far easier to keep the empire and Britain wouldn't be full with Muslims today.
Because Mosley was arrested and released in '43 and later left to Spain.
>Learn2History
Fuck, he left to France.
But still, Learn2History
I'm not talking only about Mosley. I'm talking about the entire British foreign policy.
Wasn't their slogan to support the 2nd strongest power in Europe? Russia was the strongest. They should have supported Germany.
Because muh churchill and pressure from private lobbyists?
Would Burgerland have aligned with the Reich if the UK did? Where does Japan fit into this being an ally that attacks the burgers?
Japan attacked Burgerland because Burgerland stopped selling the Japs oil, but I could be wrong.
>Without them being part of the allies Hitler could have defeated Russia.
Hans, bitte.
From the English perspective, Hitler was a pest that kept breaking sanctions and acting out of order. Why would they team up with Germany and betray WW1 allies?
>siding with the eternal Kraut
A history of liberalism probably didn't help either.
>Why did England not become fascist?
No red scare and no economic crisis to use as a scape goat to distract the masses.
Burgerland was at the time pretty close ideologically to the Nazis, only less extreme. But old ties were stronger and they favoured their old allies.
>no land lease
>no wars in Africa that distract Hitler and tie resources
>no 2nd front
>no bombings of German infrastructure
>many countries don't declare war on Hitler
>America doesn't have a reason to intervene
TL;DR Russia is fucked.
>80% of Germany's Army was in the eastern front
>Most of the things you mentioned only started happening after Germany started losing the Eastern Front
I'll be fair.
If Japan had attacked Russia instead of Burgerland, burgerland stood neutral and Hitler managed to get Fascist neutral countries on his side, there was a chance of victory.
The entire fascist aesthetic never appealed to Brits; they just found it comical. Also Britain had a stable history without foreign invasions or political revolution. In short, there was no butthurt to fuel radical political movements.
I never understood why Britain hated Germany so much historically.
We have a lot in common. We contributed a lot to inventions, culture, industry etc.... we both told the pope to fuck off.
Hell even our language is pretty similar. Wasser/Water - Feuer/Fire - Thunder/Donner - Earth/Erde - man/mann - brother/bruder - schwester/sister etc...
It's a damn tragedy that we had to side with fucking orientals and spaghettis and you even with ruskies.
Together we could have reshaped the planet.
Fascism was a mistake.
Fascism is the most inefficient method to govern a country, and the most inhumane.
You'd have turned on them soon enough. Fascism always need war and enemies.
I don't think Brits gave a shit about Germany until William II started yelling how Germany needed to be a superpower with a colonial empire and a huge oceangoing navy.
Turns out that it's actually a lot easier to just import food, rather than murder millions of slavs for "living space".
>Fascism is the most inefficient method to govern a country, and the most inhumane.
Soviet communism is worse. At least fascism has some elements of competition, consumption and market.
In a way the Soviet Union was more fascistic than fascism itself.
Before the US became best goy, england carried that title.
Anglos in general just love having that kosher dick balls deeps.
That was only because Nazi Germany never really perfected the totalitarian societal controls of the USSR.
because you're basically the same people. An evil people
Hitler's regime was literally right hand versus left hand.
All Nazis were huge Americaboos and watched too many Western movies.
They were just jelly that America has all that clay and they don't. In a way Hitler wanted to repeat what America did with the Indians. And with slavery of black people.
The difference is that negros and Indians didn't have 30 000 fucking tanks like the Russians did and weren't a superpower.
I agree that it was a stupid fucking idea. What did they expect? Russians weren't nomads/savages as much as the Nazis wanted to equal the two. They actually had a real ancient culture which was worth to be defended.
>we
>All Nazis were huge Americaboos
>America is half negroised, and the other half Judeified.
t. Adolf Hitler
Hitler was totally inconsistent and said different things at different times. Sometimes he admired the US (for example, racial segregation and the conquest of Indians), other times he claimed Americans were pussified race-mixing Jew servants.
>Russians weren't nomads/savages as much as the Nazis wanted to equal the two. They actually had a real ancient culture which was worth to be defended
>inb4 Butthurt Belt
Because Churchill was an idiot who wanted to turn his country into what he was fighting against
public =/= private
Stalin also loved American movies. Just like the Kim family in North Korea. It's their job to denunciate their enemy in public, but in private they still consume American culture.
Hitler was also a big Disney fan.
Kim Jong Il and Kim Jong Un more so but Kim Il Sung really didn't care for American culture at all. He was on record as saying how "horrible" jazz music was and he much preferred Russian music.
Muh balance of power
Yep. Almost everything the Nazis did, the Soviets did first and far better. 5 year plans, camps, secret police, liquidations of entire countries and their intelligentsia, the forced starvation of an entire population, forced labor etc...
Trust me, the Soviets were really fucking evil. If Poland didn't stop them in the 20s they would have penetrated right into Europe.
But for weird reasons they aren't considered evil guys, only Germans.
Germany didn't have 500 years of being ruled by a god emperor with political police and labor camps as Russia did. Nazism took atrocities and barbarism to a higher level than the Soviets simply out of lacking more refined instruments of control.
Also, winner writes the history books and all that.
UK was allies with the Czar not the Bolsheviks
Similar history and influence on the world, but ideologically English tend to be individualist, Germans tend to be collectivist. It's made any union unworkable really.
Regardless of what our histories have in common, we just don't seem to get along.
That's also why Poland has been peculiarly resistant to totalitarian ideologies.
The nazis's crime were motivated ideologically.
>Poland has been peculiarly resistant to totalitarian ideologies
I'd doubt it. They have always had a serious conservative bias this last decades, and consider anything left to conservative right to be socialistic commies.
Nazi ideology operated on a race hierarchy which went something like this:
Top level: Germans
High level: Other northern Europeans
Mid level: Celts, Middle Easterners, East Asians
Low level: Slavs, Negroes
Bottom level parasite races: Jews, Gypsies
Goes back to medieval times. Poland always had a decentralized, republican-lite system. They've always deplored centralized, authoritarian government. It's completely anathema to their culture.
>They've always deplored centralized, authoritarian government.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think it's a Slavic thing, really. Russia is a Federation of Republics with various degree of autonomy, Ukraine and Belarus have the same divisions in oblasts with ridiculous autonomy levels, Yugoslavia was a decentralised federation, Bosnia is still a federation.
It's completely adverse to French centralisation.
Probably because Mosley had incredibly creepy beady little eyes
France does not have a history of a top-down totalitarian government like Russia though going back to medieval times.
> top-down totalitarian government
That was basically Louis XIV and after, though. Even before we were incredibly centralised and responded only to the king. The Republic took this even further because they completely distrusted the "province". Even today, Paris is 50% of our GDP easily, and that's because we invested in outer metropolis like Lyon and Lille to avoid having a completely barren and dead countryside.
Lot of geographers used to describe "Paris and the French desert."
Because they tricked you into war
>why didnt Britain become a Nazi puppet
hmm i wonder