>condemn German fascism and fight against it
>all the while keeping half of the globe under their thumb and treating the locals as subhumans due to their race

Shouldn't this much hypocrisy cause intense physical discomfort?

It's been silenced by effected post-war propaganda.
Even tho we often cite the German Nuremberg laws as viciously evil, it wasn't that far from American Jim Crowe, and different apartheid race laws in many British dominions such as Australia

>>17773610 (OP)
The difference is that Germans are subhumans and the Anglo stays winning.

>>17773655
Won the "ruled by Jeets and Pakis" award recently, yeah.

>>17773659
And Germany is ruled by Jews, too afraid of confronting their past to stand up to Netanyahu. The Anglosphere is the greatest blessing the world has ever known, by quite a large margin; you live in Bangladesh.

>>17773667
Protests against Israel recently got universities in the USA defunded.

>you live in Bangladesh
Even living in a Jeetland would be less humiliating than being ruled by Jeets, like the Brits. Never said I was German.

>>17773683
>jeetland is ruled by jeets

>>17773625
largely because they moved on from those laws to a policy of outright massacre within under a decade
but also Euro-Americans of the time were way more cool with racial discrimination (enlightened, scientific) than religious (backwards, medieval)

>>17773693
>largely because they moved on from those laws to a policy of outright massacre within under a decade
Sure, but not immediately after 1945, and certianly not in the early 1940s when propaganda campaign against Germany was in full swing.

There is a lot of hypocrisy in the allied narrative and you dont need to be a Hitler-apologist to see that.
There is often a highligh how Germany was willing to invade and occupy other states, but they did so because it was necessary to the war effort. They occupied neutral Denmark for a better strategic positon, and Hungary to secure oilfields. What isnt highlighted is that the allies occupied neutral Iceland for a better strategic position, and neutral Iran to secure the oilfields.
Doesnt mean they were morally no better than the Axis, but it does mean that there are a lot of "complications" with ww2 because it wants to be regarded as one-sided as possible.

If you're a zoomer, you always lived in a world where plenty of jeetskins had access to the internet, you may of course dislike it but you're used to it

For us Millennials, it was different. We had to impotently watch the internet turn from a beautiful incorporeal land of mostly free and civilised discussion where everyone had an IQ of 110 and thought of themselves as an individual to a place where everything is rooted in identity politics and every exchange is structured so as to maximise dopamine release while minimising effort.

Online scamming was always a problem, but right now it has reached unprecedented levels. There used to be a time when you could talk to someone online and as long as you had common interests, they would have gladly had a conversation with you, even girls on the internet were generally above the idea of asking for money.

Is it coming back? I don't know, but until it does, expect to see infinite "but what about brown people" comebacks to whatever your ideology or worldview is.
If your ideology is already accounting for brown people, they'll just tell you it should be even more accommodating.

There's no limit to how much they want from us, it will only stop once total subjugation either way or total separation has been achieved

>>17773746
Growing up in the late 90s-ealry 00s, the internet was almost exclusively NA and Western EU people.
The good thing was that pretty much everyone was a newfag, and because the internet was so new, everyone was just exploring. There was no single video hub like Youtube so you had to go to different webtsites for video content, the most common was Newgrounds. The internet was also a seperate sphere from the real world so everyone was just an anon and treated themselves like an alias to their IRL counterpart. Social media obviously ruined this, as everyone now treats the internet as an extension of themselves.
The internet was also extremely unregulated, the cops didnt know what to make of it. You could casually stumble on CP on a random website, or just a video you downloaded from Limewire/Kaazaa.
In chat hubs, you would have pedos everywhere, but there would also be teenage girls who would casually flash their tits for you if you asked them.

Overall 90% of the time you used the internet was just to find cheat codes for GTA2 or Age of Empire, or play Counter Strike 1.6, or watch Stickdeath videos. You couldnt spend all day because every hour online costed money and parents would freak out cause you also blocked the phone line.

But like you said, no third world trash existed on the internet yet. It was an exlusive US/CA and Western EU sphere.

>>17773808
that phase was very, very, very short. I remember looking for pop songs online around 2005 and most of the comments were already Portuguese Brazilian and whatnot

>>17773655
>Went from #1 world power that ruled 1/4 of the globe to powerless and backwater island conquered by turd worlders

>>17773610 (OP)
The brits are the most shameless hypocrites on earth but fortunate it’s catching up to them

>>17773610 (OP)
You'll find the aspects of fascism Bongs and Frogs didn't like weren't the "being mean to the wogs" parts
Churchill and Mosley had the exact same ideas about the empire

>>17773937
What didn’t they like then? The authoritarian government (which was commonplace in 95% of the world at that point), that’s it?

>>17773937
Hitler was fine with the british empire

>>17773951
>authoritarian
A poor framework for trying to understand history in general and the 20th century in particular
British Empire-ism had the pretense of being aristocratic, orderly, just, and fair (it was the white man's burden to save the brutes from themselves, after all) and a bunch of homeless guys given a brown shirt and a loaf of bread with orders to club Jews on the streets wasn't cricket. For additional information, see the British attitude towards the Russian Empire c. 1815-1914
Plus fascism always meant strange economic ideas that the Tories, Labour, and LibDems all didn't care for.

>>17773953
That's only what he said.
A lot of times words from politicians are meaningless and often deceptive.

>>17773981
>British Empire-ism had the pretense of being aristocratic, orderly, just, and fair (it was the white man's burden to save the brutes from themselves, after all)
Did they genuinely believe that for a second, or was that lip service?

If it was lip service, they shouldn't have cared enough to lose that many men fighting Germany.

>>17773998
They opposed Germany almost entirely for realpolitik reasons (not wanting another Napoleon to unite Europe against them). British opposition to fascism as an an ideology was largely based around them being brutish and low-class, yes.

>>17773808
>You couldnt spend all day because every hour online costed money and parents would freak out cause you also blocked the phone line.

Fixed-price internet bills and phone-independent routers started being a thing in the mid-noughties, I remember that quite well.
I'd say the golden age was 2005-2008, the right combination of browsing speed and demographic selectivity.
If I'm not mistaken everyone got on Facebook in mid-2008, but I'm not sure since I never touched it myself and to this day I still think forcing every internet user to be anonymous would be a better policy choice than forcing everyone to namefag

>>17773998
Most states believe in the rightousness of their foreing affairs, just look at USA and Russia today.

The empire was mostly a bourgeoisie game based on prestige and power projection, the lower classes of the labour movements had a pretty good idea of how immoral the empire was, so the conservatives pulled the whole "white mans burden" to justify it, tho they probably believed in it themselves, similar to how the USSR justified the Warsaw pact with the whole "proletarian internationalism" even tho they were perfectly aware that these people were essentially held hostage by the Soviet state, the Soviet government still had their spoons of cope-fuel that it was for the greater good.

>>17773983
Follow up then? Retard? What did he do to Britain besides showing them mercy at Dunkirk? Prior to Churchill declaring unconditional war of course.

>stormcel has entered the thread, armed with alternative history fan fiction

>>17773655
Polack living off London welfare spotted