Was it autism?

Was it autism?

it was the anglo genes

check the definition of autism retard

Being of both Anglo and Germanic descent also known as literal hell spawn.

I can now say what I dislike about him. His haircut. Look at it, it's small yet deranged, not majestic in any way, just short hair and not even prussian decent let alone beautiful. What a fag. Oh and also he was a cripple.

bong royals were/are krauts tho

you're not supposed to look at his haircut, that's what the stache is there for

He made a lot of bad decisions but he didn't intend any evil. All he wanted was for Germany to be as great as Britain, the nation he admired so much

Is there any decent biography of this man? Doesn't seem to be much.

He really didn't do much of importance, which is odd considering his position as monarch of a major power during one of the 20th centuries defining events. His biggest contribution to world history, was successful ruining anglo-german relations to such an extent that Britain sided with France in WW1. It could have very easily gone the other way, with Britain siding with Germany against France and Russia.

Apparently jealous of his relatives on the isle and being crippled at birth due to a botched operation led to an inferiority complex. Also he was the son of a man rumoured to have autism and an contemporary of Bismarck.

So, probably yes. Still one of my favorite monarchs.

He was a faggot, there's your answer

>became a shut in after being embarrassed after he revealed his power level about Anglos, Frogs and Japs
Yes

who was better

Aspergers maybe

No, he was a hero slandered by Anglo propaganda due to his brave fight against and recognition of the Anglo meance.

His erratic behavior puts him closer to what we'd now call ADHD.

>It could have very easily gone the other way, with Britain siding with Germany against France and Russia.

Doubtful
Britain and France had been buddies for a century
Even in the 1870 war, Britain was more on France's side than on Germany's

Not a chance would Britain have sided with Germany over France, Germany was too much of a threat to Britain's balance of power doctrine.

Yes, and smug

>Germany was too much of a threat to Britain's balance of power doctrine

The "balance of power" was much more threatened by the Franco-Russian alliance than by Germany. No, Britain became concerned about Germany for one simple reason, and that had everything to do with battleships. The British empire depended on having an overwhelming powerful navy. It wasn't enough to simply have the world's largest navy; it had to be so big that it was bigger than next two largest navies combined.

It was the dreadnought arms race that drove Britain into the arms of France. It is quite possible that in a world were the Kaiser chose not to engage in naval build-up, you'd see a neutral Britain in WW1, or perhaps even an Anglo-German alliance. But Britain was unable to stomach the fact that Germany was building a navy capable of rivaling its own, and that is what led to the breakdown in anglo-german relations that preceded WW1.

I-i'm anglo-germanic desu!