Nobody has studied this counter-factual history, nor made the case more cogently than Patrick Buchanan, whose book on it I have:
Buchanan 2008: "Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War -- How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World"
Buchanan argues that had Britain made peace with Germany, it could have kept the Empire while Germany ruled Europe.
The world's dominant values would then be German imperial rather than American anti-colonial.
I don't agree with Buchanan on much, but if we are going to consider counter-factual hypotheses, his makes as much sense as any.
I would much prefer to consider a counter-factual history where Patton continued on to destroy Russia, claimed the Middle East and instituted Pro-American capitalist regimes throughout the world. Buchanan is an embarassment to conservatism.
I never read the book, but I suspect I'd disagree with a lot in it. Even if they hadn't fought on alone in WWII, the Brits were on precarious financial footing after having financed WWI. Even with an alliance with Germany, I think they still would have lost India. I doubt Canada and Australia would have been real happy about such an accommodation.
I think I'll just stop before being jailed under henkster's law.