Fascism is hard to pin down, but one word must be used when describing fascism: Elitism. As such, the fascist nature of the British empire is more easily exposed.
Let’s start out acknowledging that the vital aspect of fascism is the power of the larger (or stronger, more dominant) group, and the subsequent muting of other voices in light of the decision making process. It means that there is a top layer that follows its own drummer, has control over the majority via different routes and means, and suppresses anyone not cooperating with that agenda or pushes them out of the way/moves them abroad (where they will have little influence and can help the fascist agenda at the same time).
As such, structural philosophers can contribute well to the discussion what fascism is. Fascism is a structural setup occurring among some forms of power.
If we take global domination by the UK in the centuries prior to US global dominance, then we need not call that fascism, but we surely can. By following the free-market instruments, and yet overpowering all others where possible, the UK is perhaps the most successful fascist nation in Europe’s history since Rome puts its hands on the Mediterranean Sea and much of Europe. Interestingly, the UK did so by promoting a liberal agenda, while suppressing any critique about its fascist nature.
Even today, most people in the UK are likely not aware of the fascist roots that were put in place with the Navigation Acts, many centuries ago.
At that time, the Dutch dominated the world seas, with five out of every six ships on the oceans flown under that flag.
They were the ones that invented the modern capitalist system that the entire world now embraces, and that the communists call the Anglo-Dutch system. Once it was recognized as the reason for the Dutch success, the British incorporated the new financial approach into society, and took it to the next level by adding some powerful steps to it.
Once the Navigation Acts had been put in place, and UK sailors only could use UK harbors for shipments, the rise of the British Empire began.
Even Dutch investments entered the UK, because money and investors care about their profits more than they care about countries.
Slowly but surely, the British overtook the Dutch trading posts and instead of having the free market rule the day, the British stamp was placed on many locale around the world. The British successfully occupied many nations, and perhaps even more importantly kept other nations out, so they and they alone could play the free market game in this vast empire.
Nationalism as we know it today therefore started out with the British Navigation Acts, undermining the small Dutch country that was guided by the free market by imposing the rule that bigger is better because it can dominate better. This is in essence a fascist tactic, and ultimately this initial approach can get linked all the way to the occurrences of WW I and WW II in which many people lost their lives. The successful formula of combining a free market with a territorial domain was followed by anyone not wanting to be swallowed by others surely following it.
Only with the help of the US after WW II was the world liberated of the fascist game to occupy others, which is again both the domination of other people and preventing third nations from doing the same in those locales. The US had their own games to win, but did so by promoting self-rule for colonies.
Anyone not acknowledging the enormous fascists trends of Europe that started in the UK does not understand the wider concept of fascism.
It takes a structural philosopher to point that out. As always, history is written by the winners, so we need not necessarily expect historians to be the guiding light here. It will be quite difficult for UK historians to put the fascist label on their own nation, even when they agree with the nature of the British empire as being (partly) fascist.
Expect many nations to hide their own fascist nature (read: selfish nature by the elite of a group or nation). As people found inside a dominated group, we can go as far as to not even object to an empire not wearing any clothes. We may deny what is inherent when the top layer rules in fascist manners.
Even the winner-take-all approach to democracy in place in UK and US today can get labeled as fascist in nature because winners means losers, voters not represented by their own representatives. The losers may be as large as 49.9% of the voting population, clearly indicating a divide-and-conquer aspect with a fascist nature of domination and suppression. Meanwhile, both nations taut their commitment to freedom — that is, their elite’s freedom.
