The standard explanation for the failure of fascism in Britain is the Whiggish one, that British parliamentary institutions were too strong and well developed to fall prey to such an ephemeral movement. This explanation is based on the argument that fascism was a foreign invention, alien to British ways. British fascists, in particular Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists (BUF), were basically imitators, in thrall to Mussolini and, later, Hitler. No such peculiar imports would ever succeed on British soil. As a letter writer to the New Age put it in response to an article by Oscar Levy praising Mussolini,

With the exception of the extravagances of national self-aggrandisement, this view of Britain is one that still basically underpins the historiography of British fascism. After surveying the potential challengers to parliamentary stability – the Irish question, suffragism, trade unions, the effects of the First World War – one scholar notes that ‘During the 1920s, then, there was little opportunity for extremist parties to gain any purchase on the political system’, and goes on to conclude that ‘Ultimately, the failure of the BUF and of the earlier fascist movements to gain greater support must be attributed to the established parties’ success during the interwar years in maintaining and even increasing their support.’ Among historians and political theorists, British fascism is usually treated as something of a joke, only marginally less risible than the Irish Blue Shirt movement. Even its most careful historian believes that, in the last instance, British fascism ‘was small beer’, and that, ‘In terms of its impact on society and politics, British fascism has been over-rated.’