Why did they reject fascism?

>>3332796
Constitutional Monarchy > Left/Right Memes.

>>3332796
Because they're not fuckin stupid.

And God save the King, Nazi bastards.

>>3332799
This. Monarchy gives a country stability, so there is no need for extremes.

>>3332837
Wasn't Italy a monarchy when Mussolini took over?

>>3332897
Yes, but the Pope is the rightful King of Europe, so all other monarchy fails

>>3332796
Because Mosley was put in prison. By the time he ran again Nazism soured the idea of fascism.

>>3332837
The British constitutional monarchy gave most of the power to the elected parliament

>>3332796
Facism more easily finds root in revanchism. Britain has a history of being numero uno.

>>3332916
That's what *constitutional* monarchy means, my man.

>>3332897
But Italy does not have a long history as an actual nation-state, whereas England does.

>>3332796
because they're not idiots

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-Ef3WYWJYc

>>3332937
Yes but the post said that monarchy provides stability and I was pointing out that Britain wasn't a good example.

>>3332944
> Britain is not a good example of stable government
What? Possibly the most stable government there has ever been.

>>3332796
The Zionist Churchill pushed Britain away from fascism due to being on the Jewish payroll
Fascism would've meant an end to Rothschild control over the nation's central banks and a collapse of Jewish world hegemony

>>3332796
Because Brits are natural (((individualists))), that explains why they're so chummy with the kikes. Fascism requires a sacrifice of individual for the sake of the collective, and Brits abhor that.

>>3332796

Liberalism is deep-rooted in the British psyche, as is the concept of the rule of law. Neither is at all compatible with absolutism of any sort, in fact the last time an English ruler attempted to rule autocratically, the Based Bongs cut his head off.

>>3332953
Nigga thoumst be daft or japing?

>>3332811
More like because the sitting government banned fascism

We didn't need to. We already owned 25% of the world, had a stable constitutional money and were a global superpower. What incentive would a country that already stands above everyone else have to change what its doing?

File: "A_menace_we_must_beat"_-_NARA_-_513738.jpg (1MB, 2388x3000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2388x3000px

>>3332796
I guess being attacked by Nazis is a pretty good reason to fight them.

>>3332966
(You)

>smug brits huffing their own shitgas about how they much they love responsible fair government and would never stand for repression
>not even 100 years ago they were machinegunning stone age spearchuckers for no reason
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_expedition_to_Tibet
>The Tibetans were mown down by the Maxim guns as they fled. "I got so sick of the slaughter that I ceased fire, though the general’s order was to make as big a bag as possible", wrote Lieutenant Arthur Hadow, commander of the Maxim guns detachment. "I hope I shall never again have to shoot down men walking away."[19]

>not even 50 years ago they were torturing and murdering people in concentration camps
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mau_Mau_Uprising
>"Things got a little out of hand. By the time I cut his balls off, he had no ears, and his eyeball, the right one, I think, was hanging out of its socket. Too bad, he died before we got much out of him.[209]"

>>3332920
This. WWII was a beta uprising. Daily reminder that Italy and Germany were weak countries that unified way too late and had almost no colonies. They were husks of their former selves (Italy at least, Germany was always shit).

>>3332993
>A nation once conquered and subjugated technologically inferior peoples

Holy shit that's crazy

>>3332955
This.

>>3332953
That's not a result of the king (In fact, some of the most politically unstable periods in british history were caused by King's being fucking morons) it's a result of the soverignty of parliament and our uncodified constitution, the only reason we haven't has significant points where you can say "Yes, Britain's political system changed here" is because we don't have a constitution to change in the first place.

>>3333005

What is fascism?

>>3332953
It's not a good example because, at least since the 19th century, most of the power has been in the hands of the elected parliament, rather than a king or queen.

>>3333005
Who'd have thought a nation would do such a thing?