And that was being an asshole: if the Nazis had successfully invaded the UK (or Ireland) I'm quite sure there would have been lots of people perfectly willing to help round up Jews for slaughter. Likewise in the US. Do you have any idea how widespread that sort of eugenicist  thinking was at the time or how popular fascism was outside of the countries  that implemented it? The importance of WWII's history is that any nation can act incredibly badly when whipped up by dangerous fools. It can happen there, and quite possibly would have.

I didn't deny that eugenicist thought and support for fascism existed among a large number of people outside of those countries which implemented it.  (Eugenicist thought in America was more of an issue of the Progressive Era, though, from what I've read.)  What I am saying is that I don't see America or Britain as having been terribly at risk of internal far-Right takeovers.  (Far-Left, perhaps, but even this -- despite the far-Left building some momentum in the '30s -- seems unlikely, at least in America's case.  FDR soaked up those voters.)  What I am also saying is that "Islamofascism" (whatever that means) does not, as time has passed, seem to have produced the same mentality of fixation on all-out war that the Cold War produced.  Among some, it might appear to have done so, but such shows of determination seem strained, at best.  No one in his or her right mind believes that Islamic extremism poses as great a threat as the Soviet Union.  And I also think that we live in an era when a much larger number of people are willing to stand up against the mistreatment of Arab Muslims.  Seventy years ago, Abu Ghraib might not have even made the newspapers.  Today, it is an enormous scandal.

So perhaps I was an asshole, but I think you're overestimating the extent to which people supported those ideas here.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.