World = fight between england and germany

Think about it.

representative democracy and it's multitude of contributers = english
fascism, hegel perverted the idea of freedom from tyranny into freedom from "yourself", thus fascism = german

capitalism, hobbes and adam smith, justice and capitalism, enforcing justice so greed is directed towards self-improvement and industriousness = english
communism, marx (a hegelian) and the mistaken belief that you can expect people not to get greedy and to work for nothing = german

Gentleman, the idea that a gentleman is more masculine and honourable than an uncivilised wretch = england
Noble savage, the romantic idea of the noble savage, that a person more in touch with their emotions and nature will inevitably be more honourable aswell as more muscular than some corrupted decadent machiavellian civilisation dweller = german

assimiliation, expansionism is the spread of ideas and values, you do not need to physically dominate other people, just convince them that your way is preferable = england
conquest, only the dominance of the core of your nation and race is dominance, you cannot physically turn a polack into a german so they must be conquerred = germany

individualism, we are all individuals so politics must acknowledge this fact so that we can effectively work together without the powerful stamping on the faces of those underneath = england
collectivism, the fallacy that since we are better off working together we must ignore the individual's rights in the furtherance of the power of the collective = german

Higher pleasures, (john stuart mill) the purpose of life is not hedonistic, but to learn, explore, understand and contribute, to interact with other sentient beings = england
will to power, (nietzche) the unbacked belief that sentience doesn't exist, you are just an animal and your purpose in life is to be a hedonist = german

people, though people can only physically do so much when it comes to ruling a leader can't do everything, successful rulership depends on the resourcefulness and creativity of the people = england
leaders, the major decisions all happen at the top, so the leader's decisions should have as much weight as possible in order for society to do as much good as possible and people should focus more on efficiently carrying out their duties than new developments = german

>>5
Britain was the closest thing to a democracy at this time, banning slavery in 1833, allowing landowners and later all men over the age of 18 to vote, with a free market economy and slowly increasing civil liberties within Britain during the course of the victorian era.

"Who are you to judge that their views are incorrect or worthless?"
I am a free man.

"Their teachings became part popular culture and not their citizenship"
Spoiler: Countries have populations.

"This is why all former British colonies in Africa were societies full of integrated members of British society and not of unfree subjects whose opposition was crushed with military force."
Correct. I'm not sure whta you are getting at though, why is this relevant? I fear you understand absolutely nothing about social-politics of the 19th century, tyranny is human nature and had been practically universal since the first alpha male ape smacked another ape over the head so he could stay the alpha male. Liberty arose due to the military threat fire-arms gave the ordinary man allowing them to form communities that the military junta had to keep happy. The british coerced fragmented nations and replaced native tyrants with british tyrants because that was all they could do. The british were suckerred into tyranny and that is evil but every other nation did this, the difference is that Britain banned slavery in 1833, slowly increased civil liberties during the course of the victorian era and fought for and laid the foundations for modern representative government. In effect in the last 200 years the world has gone from a tyrannic germanised world of tyranny, to a democratic anglicised world of seemingly exponential technological and economic growth.

Kant was a scientific philosopher not a political philosopher. His works were kept in the upper ranks of german society and never gained popularity amongest the german population.