Eckener Topic of Discussion at Yearly WTW Conference by Zach Anderson

Entry for the DBWI Writing Contest.

At this year’s Worlds that Weren’t Conference in Chicago, several famous counterfactual authors sat on a panel to discuss the impact of one of modern history’s most famous statesman: Hugo Eckener, the last president of the German Republic from 1932-1939, and foreign minister of the restored German Empire from 1940-1942. Those on the discussion panel included Terry Dove, author of Das International; Brian Simmons, author of Pax Europa; Frank Julian, author of Dai Nippon; Shelly Bailey, author of Madam President; and Hank Kent, author of The Dark Reich. At the heart of the discussion was whether or not the “great man theory” of history plays into counterfactual fiction, looking specifically at how Hugo Eckener affected world history and how greatly his absence would change history.

MODERATOR: Most historians would agree that Hugo Eckener had a profound impact on modern history. But just how deep was that impact? And what would our world be like if Mr. Eckener hadn’t had the impact he had on it? We’ll start the discussion off with Mrs. Terry Dove. Terry, in your book, you describe a pretty bleak outlook of a world without Eckener, do you not?

DOVE: Well, it isn’t exactly a world without Eckener. Just with him dying twelve years earlier, in 1941 instead of 1954. And it’s how he dies that in my book affects the outcome of events.

MODERATOR: Correct. You have Eckener dying in the Graf Zeppelin bombing in March of 1941 during the height of the Danzig Crisis.

DOVE: Right. In real life, Eckener was at a meeting with Danzig city leaders and was not on board the Graf when the bomb that was mailed to him exploded. In my book, the meeting is cancelled and Eckener is killed when the bomb goes off. As a result, Germany will end up sending troops to Danzig and eventually lead to war between the German Empire and Poland. The Soviet Union joins the war in 1942, and a stalemate develops.

MODERATOR: That is until you have the Soviets develop the atomic bomb decades before the weapon was actually created in real life. How do you justify that?

DOVE: Scientific papers from the time actually spoke of turning atomic research towards weapons. Luckily for us, there were no major wars going on at the time and when atomic research finally does get underway, the Germans focused on energy first. Weapons followed later. In my book, the Germans and Soviets both start working on the Atom Bomb in the mid-1940s, and the Soviets get it first because their major cities are far enough away from the fighting. The war is mainly fought in Poland and Germany, and Soviet cities are spared. This leads to the Soviets dropping the Bomb on Berlin in 1951, and from there Germany falls pretty quickly and Soviet communism spread into Central Europe.

MODERATOR: Mr. Brian Simmons, what do you think of those turn of events that Terry came up with? Your book, Pax Europa, takes a very different turn of events, does it not?

SIMMONS: Yes, yes it does. In Pax, Eckener doesn’t even get involved in the Imperial government. He declines the Kaiser’s offer and remains in Ecknerstadt with ZGI and builds airships until his death in 1954. And Europe does just fine without him. I’m not saying that Eckener wasn't a great statesman. He was. But I don’t subscribe to the Great Man theory. I think that the course of history would have stayed mostly the same. Possibly better, possibly a little worse, but very recognizable to today. Obviously, the further back in time a change occurs, the more bees there are to cause other changes and those changes eventually add up. But in a mere 70 years, I don’t think those changes would have been that drastic. The Danzig Crisis would have played out similar to OTL, and Germany and the Soviet Union would have faced off sometime in the mid-1950s with German victory.

MODERATOR: Now, in your book, it’s more than just a German victory over the Soviet Union in the 1950s, isn’t it?

SIMMONS: That’s correct. Without Eckener’s continued influence, the Imperial government starts a stronger, more aggressive rearmament in the early 1940s, and by the time the war comes they have a greater advantage. Plus, I have Stalin die earlier, of natural causes, so the leadership passes to Molotov, but Molotov doesn't have the support of Beria or some of the Army. Earlier leadership crisis equals earlier defeat, and this time more soundly, with no rump Soviet Union. A Russian Republic is established.

MODERATOR: Your book has done really well since its release this spring. Do you think that is because it creates a world where the Second Great War never happens, and with that conflict only having ended a year ago, some people see it as a way of escape from today’s realities?

SIMMONS: Oh I’m sure that has something to do with it. Never mind my writing skills (polite laughs from the members of the panel and the audience). I mean, that is part of what fiction is, an escape from our reality. And when I was writing that book, it was a nice escape at times, especially after loosing one of my nephews to the fighting on the Western Front in East Russia. In the world of Pax, there is no independent East Russia.

MODERATOR: That’s a good point. And of course, without East Russia or a restored Russian Empire, there is no cause for the outbreak of the recent war. Now Brian, I’d say that you are probably in the minority on this panel about the belief in the Great Man series. The gentleman sitting next to you, Mr. Frank Julian, certainly has a different view, right Frank?

JULLIAN: You could say that. Pax Europa is a good book, and no one can top Brian when it comes to research, detail, and authenticity. But I don’t agree that the course of history will keep going the same way regardless of who’s at the helm. And that’s definitely obvious in Dai Nippon. Just like in Terry’s book, Eckener is killed in the Graf bombing in 1941. Germany invades Poland, and war starts with the Soviets in 1942. However, unlike in Terry’s book, other western nations get involved, including the UK and France and eventually the USA. With everyone’s attention focused in Europe, Japan is free to expand with little stopping her. China falls, and several European powers sell their holdings to help finance the Polish War. Eventually the war in Europe comes to a less than satisfactory close, and at that point America and Japan go to blows. But with America being worn out from Europe, they don’t stand a chance. By the 1960s, Japan is the unchallenged power in the Pacific.

MODERATOR: Everyone I've talked to about your book loves that part of the story takes place in the restored Kingdom of Hawaii. And I personally like how you have that coming about locally, and it not being just a Japanese puppet, which is what I thought you were going to do when I first learned about Dai Nippon. Your book and Terry’s is a great showcase about the diversity in counterfactual fiction. You both use the exact same point of divergence, but come up with completely different scenarios. Speaking of unique scenarios, that brings us to Shelly Bailey and her wonderful book, Madam President. Shelly, how does Eckener fit in to your world?

BAILEY:  Well, in the book Eckener is able to avoid some of his missteps in the later 30s and prevents the restoration of the German Empire. The German Republic remains in force, and Eckener actually gets reelected in 1938, and will serve as Germany’s president until 1944. One of the political fallouts of this will eventually be earlier women’s rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s that spreads around the world. The book focuses on the election of America’s first female president in 1968.

MODERATOR: I have to say this was one of the more unique outcomes of an alternate life for Mr. Eckener. Would you say that you subscribe to the Great Man theory as well?

BAILEY: Yes I do. The people in charge steer the way history goes. Now, the changes aren’t always super drastic, especially not at first. The closer to the change you are, the fewer bees have moved about differently, but eventually changes happen.

MODERATOR: That’s a good argument. Now the Bee Effect Theory has been mentioned several times during this discussion, and I think Mr. Hank Kent’s book, The Dark Reich, illustrates that theory, and it’s heavy application, quite well. Hank, what’s your take on Eckener’s importance.

KENT: Well, in my book, Eckener doesn’t run in the 1932 election, and the different outcome is quite drastic. Adolf Hitler, who in reality is little more than a footnote in history, would have likely beat Communist Ernst Thälmann, bringing fascism to power in Germany exactly a decade after it took power in Italy. Hitler and Mussolini team up, and then they both help Oswald Mosley take power in the mid 1940s, more than two decades ahead of OTL. Meanwhile, America starts putting more and more distance between itself and fascism, aligning itself more and more when the Soviet Union. The Dark Reich, which is the first book in a series of three, starts out in the mid 1960s as the world finds itself on the brink of a global conflict between the nations of the Right, which is most of Western Europe, and the nations of the Left, which is the Soviet Union, the United States and much of Latin America.  Quite the departure from the normal scenarios with Eckener. Which in a way is strange, when you think about it. Eckener NOT becoming President of Germany in 1932 would have been the biggest change of all. Also, I have always found it odd that more counterfactual novels don’t have the USA drift into the USSR’s camp. I mean, the Socialist Party has been one of the strongest parties in this country for the past two decades, and it seems natural to me to see that shift to the left happen even sooner in Counterfactual novels, especially ones that have PODs set in the 1930s.

MODERATOR: You know, you bring up an interesting point there when you say that the most obvious POD with Eckener is to not have him elected President in 1932. Well, I have one for all of you that is almost never done in CF fiction. What if President Hindenburg hadn't died in February 1932? If he hadn't died, he would almost definitely have been reelected as President. What would have happened if his death were postponed until 1933 or 1934? Any takers on that?

KENT: Honestly, I think a world where Hindenburg lives another couple of years would probably resemble the world of my book. With more time, Hitler could build a stronger political base and likely gain the chancellorship under a second Hindenburg term. The Nazis were slowly but surely growing before Eckener and his administration cracked down on them. It’s conceivable that the Nazis could have had enough of a majority in 1933 or 1934 to put Hitler in as chancellor. I've heard arguments that this might have mellowed him, making him adapt to the democratic system to the point he would tone down his anti-Semitic and war mongering rhetoric, but I think he could easily retained his earlier fire.

SIMMONS: What Hank says is a possibility, but I’m inclined to disagree. I think that, the longer the democratic system remains in place, the more unlikely radical leaders could have gained control. Furthermore, by 1934, we are farther removed from the start of the Great Depression, and it is likely that things would already be on the mend and people would start tuning out the radicals on both the left and the right. In all likelihood, by 1934 the Nazis would have lost seats and be a minority party, maybe just above fringe level, and when the country voted for a successor to Hindenburg, more moderate voices have a better chance of being heard. And who knows, Eckener could end up being approached by the Centre Party and the SPD to run in 1933 or 1934 if Hindenburg died then instead of when he actually did.

DOVE: I actually read an essay posted online a few years back that posed pretty much this scenario. Hindenburg doesn't die in 1932, and is reelected defeating both Hitler and Thälmann. The Nazis gain a little in elections held in 1933, and Hitler is appointed as a senior member of the cabinet under Chancellor Otto Wels. In 1934, the Nazis loose seats and then in the summer, Hindenburg dies. The author then predicted that Wels would run for the President and win, again beating the Nazis and the Communists. Another moderate politician would become Chancellor, and Hitler might remain for another year or so in the Cabinet. But by the end of the 1930s, the Nazis would have lost enough seats in the Reichstag that Hitler was removed from government and the party breaks up in the 1940s.

JULLIAN: I think I read that same essay as well, and I’m not sure I agree. Remember, we are talking about a party that attempted to kill Eckener and succeeded in killing Otto Wels in the fall of 1932. People who are willing to do stuff like that will put up a strong fight, and I question whether or not they’d use any means necessary to make sure Hitler wins the next presidential election to fill a vacancy left by Hindenburg later in the 1930s. I've read most of Mien Kampf, Hitler’s manifesto he wrote in 1923. It took a life sentence in prison to break Hitler’s radical spirit. Anything short of that….I’m very skeptical. And I also don’t know that Eckener would have had as easy a time of it if he didn't run until 1933 or 1934. In those two years, the Nazis could likely have increased their base and be in a much stronger place to challenge Eckener’s election than they were in 1932.

This is just a snippet of the debate that went on during this hour and a half panel discussion that occurred at WTW 2006. The full discussion can be found online at wwn.wtwonline.usa/2006/panels, along with several other panel discussions that occurred, including a related topic to Eckener: the importance of Airships in modern aviation. In that discussion, several authors and experts discuss how the craft have impacted modern history, and try to figure out how their development could have gone differently.

-Hugo Tyler, Science Fiction Magazine, June 2006.

* * *

Zach Anderson is studying to become a history teacher  in Oklahoma. When he's not working on his studies, he likes to think about what might have been in years past, and when he gets a particularly good idea going, it will end up on his blog, the Weekly Chrononaut. You can find his biggest work, The Airship President and Legacy, a world where the airship survives, Hitler never comes to power, and where the Soviet Union crumbles in the 1970s, on that blog in addition to several other stories. He also posts on alternatehistory.com under the username Eckener.

And The Winner of the Balkanize Me Contest is...

Our second contest, Balkanize Me, has officially come to an end. Although we had less entries than our last writing contest, thankfully the quality of entries did not change. Here is the complete list of submissions in the order they appeared:

Excerpt from Modern History of Oklahoma and Sequoyah, 1890-Present by Zach Anderson

Body Impolitic by Thespitron 6000

January 4, 1815 - New England Secedes by Jeff Provine

Il Sogno della Patria by Dimas Aditya Hanandito

The More Things Change: A Tale of the Aether Age by Grant Gardiner

The range of writing styles for an average alternate historian is quite evident in this contest. I was especially tickled by the humorous entries The Update received. All good things, however, must come to an end. Only one can be crowned the winner and his name is...

DIMAS ADITYA HANANDITO

Congrats Dimas, you will be receiving a blu-ray copy of Iron Sky. Your short story about a divided Italy secured the most page views overall, with Jeff's outline for a balkanized America and Thespitron 6000's parody of the trope coming in second and third place respectively.

Thank you to everyone for participating and stay tuned tomorrow for a special announcement regarding the future of submitting to The Update.

* * *

Matt Mitrovich is the founder and editor of Alternate History Weekly Update, a blogger on Amazing Stories and a volunteer editor for Alt Hist magazine. His fiction can be found at Echelon Press, Jake's Monthly and The Were-Traveler. When not writing he works as an attorney, enjoys life with his beautiful wife Alana and prepares for the inevitable zombie apocalypse. You can follow him on Facebook or Twitter.

Excerpt from Modern History of Oklahoma and Sequoyah, 1890-Present by Zach Anderson

From Chapter 1: Statehood

The Twin Territories and the Election of 1904

At the turn of the 20th century, north of the State of Texas, lay the so-called “Twin Territories,” referring to the Oklahoma and Indian Territories. In these two lands, the Federal Government relocated thousands upon thousands of Native American tribes from their original lands to this relatively small location. The most famous, of course, were the “Five Civilized Tribes”. They were called “civilized” because they had adopted a lot of customs and traditions thought of as belonging to the “white man’s culture.” They built houses, had governments, and some even had their own alphabet. Although moved there against their will, these tribes would soon leave their own marks on the map of North America.

Prior to 1890, this whole area had been Indian Territory, but pressure for white settlement in the region resulted in the famous land-runs of 1889, giving away land not used by the tribes. The subsequent creation of Oklahoma Territory in 1890 was out of the western half of Indian Territory. In the following years, more and more Indian land in Oklahoma territory was given away to white settlement at the expense of the Native American inhabitants. The leaders of the “Five Tribes” recognized this pattern and feared it would be repeated in their own territory. They began to discuss different options to preserve their lands and autonomy, coming to the conclusion that they must organize and petition the Federal Government for the creation of their own state.  Meetings between the different tribal governments set up the plan for a statehood convention to be held in the town of Muskogee in July 1905.

Out of the hands of these tribal leaders, the Election of 1904 would be critical for their plan to succeed. The Republican Party, which nominated Senator Mark Hannah to succeed the two-term presidency of Republican William McKinley, feared the creation of more Democratic-controlled states, and upsetting the balance of power between Eastern and Western states. When asked about the Oklahoma and Indian territories, most Republicans in Congress supported combining the two territories into a single state. On the other hand, the Democratic Party, which once again nominated William Jennings Bryan as their candidate, supported a two state plan, both liking the idea of giving their party the chance for two new pro-Democratic states and also wanting to protect the rights of Indians and their treaties.

The leaders of Indian Territory got lucky. The later half of William McKinley’s presidency had been rough. Economic problems and several severe labor disputes had made the country wary of many Republicans. To make matters worse, McKinley’s Vice President, Theodore Roosevelt, was outraged that Senator Hannah had prevented him from getting the Republican Party’s nomination. He campaigned as an independent under a loose party he created called the National Party. McKinley’s unpopularity combined with the severe divisions within the Republican Party led to a major sweep for the Democrats. With Bryan’s inauguration in March of 1905, the stage was set for the leaders of Indian Territory to create their own state.

The 1905 Convention

The date for the start of the Indian Territory Statehood Convention was set for Monday, July 31, 1905. The delegates elected William C. Rogers, Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation, as the President of the Convention, and Green McCurtain, Chief of the Choctaw Nation, as Vice President. The delegates had several issues to overcome. First among them was the status of the tribal governments that were represented. Federal policy was to “Americanize” the Native Indians and according to the Curtis Act of 1896, Washington would no longer recognize tribal governments after 1906. There were many in attendance that wanted to find some way to circumvent this looming deadline.

Chief Rogers introduced a revolutionary plan he hoped would help preserve some of the tribal governments at the state level even when the Federal recognition went away. Rogers proposed that the governments of the Five Tribes be integrated in to the state government. The territory would be divided into counties, which would be grouped under whatever Tribal Nation they happened to be in. Most power would still rest with the state governments, but there would be judicial and representational districts drawn along the old tribal lines. In addition, tribes would have councils to handle issues at a lower level before they had to be addressed at the state level. He also suggested that “tribal” citizenship would be based upon who lives in the boundaries of that tribe, not on who was actually Indian blood. This was quite bold, and definitely a departure from just about every other state government in existence in the whole of the Union at the time.

Despite worry from some, including delegate Charles N. Haskell of the Creek Nation, the delegates decided to base their constitution on this plan. Haskell believed strongly in separate statehood, and so he fought hard to get the language of the proposals changed so as to avoid the potential rejection of the Federal government. In the final document, there is no mention of “tribes” or of the five nations. Instead, these political divisions were called “districts” and were named after cities: Tahlequah for the Cherokee; Okmulgee for the Creek; Wewoka for the Seminole; Tuskahoma for the Choctaw; and Tishomingo for the Chickasaws. These were to serve as an intermediary between the State and county governments, and would primarily serve as judicial districts. Some delegates criticized Haskell, saying that he was weakening the tribes too much. He countered that the Federal government would never approve a constitution with strong Indian governments. He believed that after statehood was achieved, the tribal governments could be reconstituted on some level without interference from Washington. His arguments won over most, and on September 8, the convention adopted the Constitution of the proposed State of Sequoyah. After approval by territorial voters in November, Haskell, Rogers, and several others took their proposal to the national capital to seek Federal approval.

Statehood for Indian Territory

The reaction to the proposed “State of Sequoyah” in Washington was mixed. The Republican minority in the House was mostly against the idea, as expected, and there was some confusion about the “district” structure that was included in the constitution. Some congressmen correctly made the connection to the tribal boundaries and spoke out about this as a way to slip around the Curtis Act. President Bryan met with Haskell about the proposal on January 3, 1906, and seemed amiable to the proposal, promising he would do his best to see it passed. Congress would vote later that month, ultimately approving, by some of the narrowest of margins, the Sequoyah Enabling Act.

The bill recognized the constitution adopted by the Convention held the previous summer, stated that all tribal governments within the new state would be dissolved upon statehood, and recommended that Sequoyah be recognized as a state on March 1, 1906. President Bryan signed the bill on Tuesday, January 30, 1906, after which things began to move very fast. Elections for the governorship and legislature were scheduled for February 20th, and the politicians went to work trying to secure votes. Haskell announced his candidacy as soon as he got back, as did Chief Rogers. Voter turnout was high, and Haskell was elected as first governor. As predicted, the Democratic Party controlled the new state legislature. Everything was now set for statehood.

On March 1, 1906, thousands of Sequoyahns gathered at the local courthouse in the new state capital of Muskogee, where at the stroke of noon Charles N. Haskell would be sworn in as the first governor of the new state of Sequoyah. The people were ecstatic, many waving around the new state flag (consisting of three equal stripes, blue, white, and red, with a yellow 5-pointed star in the center that was upside down just like in the new state seal), ready for their state to join the Union.

-------------

From Chapter 8: Final Devolution in the tumult of the 1950s

Native Rights Movement and Devolution

The 1950s were a tumultuous time throughout the United States. In the South, African Americas were clamoring for real equality. In the West, the Asian communities wanted equality before the law and also compensation for their poor treatment during the Second World War. Throughout the West and Midwest, Native Americans wanted true equality and restoration of their old tribal organizations. In this, the States of Sequoyah and Oklahoma led the fight.

Thanks to the planning of Sequoyah’s first governor Charles N. Haskell, the governments of the Five Civilized Tribes were gradually reconstituted over the intervening four decades. By 1950, the so-called “judicial districts” had been renamed as the original Indian nation that they represented (1919).  Those nations had elected legislatures called Councils (1930), and the state legislature had gradually granted more and more authority to those councils. In 1939, the nations elected “Executive Chiefs” who would sit on the Governor’s cabinet to represent the interests of the 5 Tribes. When the Great Equal Rights campaign erupted, the State of Sequoyah, led by its governor, Samuel Rogers, soon found itself at the forefront.

In the State of Oklahoma, things had taken a little longer to get off the ground after statehood in 1908. Many Native American’s who had means to do so moved to Sequoyah. Those who stayed did not have much in the way of representation until the 1930s, when a significant number of native representatives were elected to the state legislature in Guthrie for the first time. They began to advocate for the same kind of recognition for their tribes as what existed in Sequoyah. The first tribe to receive this was the Comanche Nation, followed by the Cheyenne and Arapaho Nation in 1948. These administrative districts were much weaker versions of what existed in Sequoyah, but were considered a “good start” by the locals.

Sequoyah’s example to other tribes across the nation caused quite a stir, with native people’s demanding legal recognition from the Dakotas to New Mexico and even back east in New England. This would become even louder in 1952. That year, as the country decided whether pro-segregationist Democrat Michael Thompson would remain in the White House or if pro-equality Nationalist-Republican Richard Morris would take office, the citizens of Sequoyah were presented with nearly a dozen changes to their constitution. They called for a level of devolution to the Five Nations that had been unprecedented at statehood forty-six years prior. State taxes would be determined by each nation, police would be handled primarily at the tribal level, as would the courts, with the Supreme Court of Sequoyah becoming the only non-tribal court. The only things remaining under the State’s control would be the National Guard, education, intra-state trade, and the state highway network. On every other issue, power would be vested in the administrative zones of the Five Nations. In addition, the constitutional changes referred to the tribal organizations not as tribes, but as “First Nations,” a term that gained wide popularity in the Equal Rights Movement. An equal rights amendment was also on the ballot, ending racial segregation.

When citizens of the state went to the polls on November 4th, 1952, the amendments were overwhelmingly approved, making Sequoyah the most devolved state in the Union. Over the next decade, other tribes would pressure their states to give similar concessions, with varying degrees of success. It is widely accepted that the actions of Sequoyahns helped frame the section of the All are Created Equal Act of 1963 dealing with native peoples, which officially adopted the term “First Nations,” and saw the creation of dozens of tribal administrative districts throughout the country by the end of the 1970s.

* * *

Zach Anderson is studying to become a history teacher  in Oklahoma. When he's not working on his studies, he likes to think about what might have been in years past, and when he gets a particularly good idea going, it will end up on his blog, the Weekly Chrononaut. You can find his biggest work, The Airship President and Legacy, a world where the airship survives, Hitler never comes to power, and where the Soviet Union crumbles in the 1970s, on that blog in addition to several other stories. He also posts on alternatehistory.com under the username Eckener.