I had to read both versions! After reading one, I really wanted to know what would happen if I chose the other future. Wonderfully well-written story, and a believable action to cause such divergent futures.
Thanks! And now you know how both of my main universes were formed! In fact...you even know the background to all four. Since this predates the events of Star Trek XI, Future #1 also applies to the universe seen in my latest story, "Cardassian Sunrise." So...which future did you choose first?
The second one. Not saying that's what I'd do if it was me in that situation but it's what I wanted him to do
A very compelling and powerful story. You used the second-person-perspective very well. I also like the multiple endings. (I chose future #1 first , but I read the other one, too.) I found both futures to be plausible. Once you have a charismatic leader with simple answers while the other side has not, all sorts of terrible acts might happen.
Thanks...and you describe exactly what Akleen is like. If I recall your location correctly, then I imagine you must have had a fairly in-depth analysis of Earth historical precedent, and I am glad to know you feel it rings true, in light of that deeper study.
You're right about my nationality but that doesn't mean we're all experts on the Third Reich. Actually, people are as ill-informed as everywhere else. Since I'm interested in history and a little obsessed with the Third Reich you're right in this case, though. However, I was thinking more abstractly when I wrote that. I'm not sure I would describe the Nazis' rise to power in that way.
Oh, I wasn't thinking in terms of "expertise" like a historian. More like...how we in the US are taught about the injustices committed against the Native Americans, and slavery, since those occurred on our home turf. Given the prominent roles those things played in our history, we had to cover the causes and effects in detail.
Yes, that's true. But let's just say I don't have a particularly high opinion of the way history is taught here in school in general. I had very good teachers and classes for the most part but that doesn't seem to be the rule.
That's a shame. I also benefited from some extremely good teachers, some of whom I'll never forget. My high-school American history teacher in particular was wonderful. I wonder, maybe when your country has only 250 years or so as a nation, and 400 with British colonies (you can go back even further to the Spanish, of course, if you want more details of contact between Europe and our future territores), maybe you get more depth. I cannot imagine having to memorize all the royal lineages that must come with German history (the Hapsburgs and everybody else!). I had to do some of that when I took Spanish history, and--YIKES!
You might have a point. History class starts with Antiquity (sometimes with Ancient Egypt and even sone prehistory if you're lucky), so there isn't that much time to go into details and to move beyond Europe, sadly (exceptions: the USA and Colonialism). We usually don't have to memorise royal lineages, though, the emphasis is more on analysis and understanding than memorisation. But yeah, about 2500 years of history cramped into 6 years of school - there's a lot not taught. I've thought about how to teach history in a different way (more emphasis on everyday life and enabling the pupils to analyse texts and sources for themselves) but it's not easily done with the time constraints there are.
That sounds like our World History classes. (And for those who take it, European History.) But the short length of American history does help us as far as depth of study on our own country.