Plausibility Review: The Man in the High Castle by Philip K. Dick

  • Published on Dec 15, 2016
  • Its one of the most influential alternate histories ever written, but how plausible is it really?
    Twitter: @alt_historian
    Amazing Stories profile:
    Become a patron! Donate and you can get exclusive content, early screenings of my videos and the chance to tell me what topics to cover next! All profits go towards making my alternate history projects self-sufficient. Go to:

Comments • 144

  • Francis Friesen
    Francis Friesen Month ago

    USSR and Britain could beat Germany ww2 went around as good as it could possibly go. USSR industry was east of the urals

  • South African
    South African Month ago

    I cild war between Caputalism and Fascism would be much more realistic, where the USA and TR developed nuclear weapons at almost the exact same time.

  • Spider Seven
    Spider Seven 2 months ago

    Yes, Germany couldn't pull off an invasion of Great Britain, but I always wondered about this idea: What if Germany had carried out Operation Sea Lion, but the invasion failed. What would that mean for Nazi Germany and World War II as a whole?

  • OconByrd519
    OconByrd519 2 months ago +2

    I like the show The Man in the High Castle but notion that he Germany could occupy the entire American continent not to mention Latin America and the Caribbean or Africa is too far fetched. They didn't have the manpower and it was just logistically impossible for them to maintain a hold on such a vast stretch of territory.
    And how did so many Americans, like John Smith, who was officer in the U.S. military so willingly switch sides and become a Nazi. I just don't buy it.

  • Michael Carrillo
    Michael Carrillo 4 months ago +1

    The alt history plausibility of the Nazis being vastly more technological advanced than we were during the same period 60's is very much not in question. The Nazis during ww2 were known to have vastly superior understanding of technology than any other industrialized nation at the time. Moon bases by the 60's are something I wouldn't exactly rule out. The draining of the Mediterranean and mars colonies are I agree completely impossible.

    • Matthew Swenson
      Matthew Swenson Month ago

      They were technologically inferior to the US. No Manhattan Project. No modern bomber project. Hell, their artillery was still horse-drawn, and soldiers were transported by train or marched on foot.

  • marc biff
    marc biff 5 months ago

    Global warming my ass.

  • Blocky Universe Productions

    ...Especially after the effort of just bashing through the Soviet Union.

  • Daniel Strain
    Daniel Strain 5 months ago

    In the television series, they had it where the Germans developed the atomic bomb first and struck DC. This makes its outcome a lot more plausible.

    • Matthew Swenson
      Matthew Swenson Month ago

      And where do the resources for their own Manhattan Project come from?

  • Martin Horowitz
    Martin Horowitz 5 months ago

    Even in our tieline the Germans had a bomber that could attack the US before the War ennded, were planning tests of Submarine launched V2's and had a two stage ICBM in early development, if the German Nuke program succeeded , they could have attacked the US. Soviets were near collapse 1st year of the war, if the Germans had taken the oil fields, and the US hadn't provided fuel and food. They could have collapsed. Without US supplies and and Lend Lease the British would likely have had to make peace with Germany.

  • Anarchy Empire
    Anarchy Empire 5 months ago

    .....this sounds like a shity version of Wolfenstein The new colosus/Order.

  • Terry JP
    Terry JP 5 months ago

    silly video. Plausible???? Its a movie. Do you think theri are actually flying Dragone and Hobbits as well?

  • goose e
    goose e 5 months ago

    The children's war to your right! Great book I never hear many people talk about it though

  • Marco Silva
    Marco Silva 5 months ago

    in the series, they drop a bomb in Washington and I suppose that the USA doesn't have the bomb.. in this alternate reality, the Nazis are technologically more advanced... I guess it's not plausible but it's easy to make an argument in favor if you want...

  • steve quinn
    steve quinn 5 months ago

    The Germans could have done it, if they had a monopoly on Nuclear weapons, had them in large numbers and used them against Britain, the Soviet Union and the U.S.
    Historically Nuclear weapons were developed in the U.S. with key input from scientist who were refugees from Hitler's Europe (i.e. Albert Einstein, Enrico Fermi and Edward Teller, etc.) So the anti-Semitic Germans doomed themselves with their own beliefs. Ain't Karma a Bitch!

  • Ikue P
    Ikue P 6 months ago

    This is very well explained and completely logical, but I think we can throw some arguments of plausibility out the window. Here's why. The book contains two alternate realities that have somehow discovered multidimensional travel, which doesn't even exist in our reality today. This is proof that the two dimensions in the book are a second and third dimension where ours would be the first. In other words, the reality in the book where the allies won the war, even that timeline is not a carbon copy of our reality. It's maybe one very similar to ours, but it's not the same. Therefore, if the 2 dimensions in the book have multidimensional travel, then that means a lot of things could have been different. We are clearly talking about a second and third dimension where Germany could have figured out how to effectively take over the East Coast.

  • Robert Drake
    Robert Drake 6 months ago

    Don't think the US would have developed nukes without going to war with Germany.

  • Rick Ragan
    Rick Ragan 6 months ago

    Sorry, but what part of "fiction" do you not understand in "Science Fiction"?

  • AdmiralBonetoPick
    AdmiralBonetoPick 6 months ago +2

    Your sound and camera are below par for TVclip, and you're one of many people on here who refer to themselves as "The Alternate Historian". Nonetheless, I'm glad you pointed out all the same things I notice: how the New Deal arguably prolonged the Great Depression, how we don't even have moon colonies in 2018 let alone 1962, the stupidity of draining the Mediterranean (which would turn southern Europe into a desert), and the impossibility of occupying the USA with its vast size and armed population (consider how much trouble Germany had even with the Yugoslav partisans). The USA's industrial output was ten times that of Japan's - no way they could maintain an advantage over us in the Pacific, let alone invade. Hitler believed Germany would not be ready to attack the USA until 1980.

  • Kevin
    Kevin 6 months ago

    After reading man in the High Castle, I was wondering what life would be like if, 1960 is like that, then I can only imagine 1997 or 1986, would it be more similar to those years or very different?

  • Chris Medeiros
    Chris Medeiros 6 months ago

    Speak. Slower.

  • R.D Bergman
    R.D Bergman 6 months ago


  • Bojan Kotur
    Bojan Kotur 6 months ago

    Mitrović! Naše gore list :-)

  • shawn stipe
    shawn stipe 6 months ago

    Only way Germany could have taking over the U.S is if the Southern states betrayed us, they had Jim Crow laws and may have been sympathetics towards the Nazis style of white supremacy. Also the KKK was very powerful throughout the U.S in the 30's, 40's and controlled many organizations. Al Germany would really have to do is start recruiting in the south, they could build a base of operations in Alabama and Mississippi. It's not implausible at all. What is amazing is that a country with racist and fascist tendencies like the united states ended up fighting racist and fascist empires and sent the world free.

  • Zayne Van Bommel
    Zayne Van Bommel 6 months ago

    Your map is completely incorrect

  • TheSovietComrade
    TheSovietComrade 6 months ago +8

    Germany would lose anyway in the Cold War against Japan because of Anime Production.

    • Jim Talbott
      Jim Talbott 2 months ago

      TheSovietComrade But Japan would loose to the Emus once they took over Australia.

  • OolTube02
    OolTube02 8 months ago +1

    The only way I can think of Nazi Germany invading the US and winning being plausible is if a) they had the Bomb before everyone else and b) Hitler had access to many alternative histories, allowing him to choose exactly the right actions to make an invasion of the US a success. a) would probably also be the result of b), Hitler having seen nukes in alternative history newsreels as well as having acquired plans to make them and knowing which foreign scientists to kill so no Manhattan project happens.
    I don't know how the book handles it but the TV series could resolve it that way.

    • tokigart
      tokigart 3 months ago

      Even with nukes I don’t think america would surrender

  • A exploding potato
    A exploding potato 9 months ago +1

    Hey could you do a plausibility review of 1984?

  • Tronnyverse
    Tronnyverse 11 months ago

    When all else fails blame the 'aliens' they helped the Nazis XD

  • DarkRedJay Productions
    DarkRedJay Productions 11 months ago

    It is pronounced Lao, the "s" is silent

  • Blonde Boi
    Blonde Boi Year ago

    2:32 I like how France is a chicken

  • IdioticProgramming
    IdioticProgramming Year ago +3

    Dislike for modern politics

  • Artpholomule Nutt

    What do you think of similar book (or was it a movie? maybe both) Fatherland? In it, the Nazis won but stopped in Europe. Hitler is about to celebrate his birthday and people come from around the world to cover it. There's a secret police officer and an American news lady and they uncover concentration camps then reveal that to the general populace and the cop feels really bad... and I don't remember the rest.
    But it shouldn't be hard to look up.
    How plausible do you think some of the details of that story are?

  • TheHyperionJanitor

    considering the United states was mostly responsible for Hitler's rise to power the invasion would have most likely had inside help

  • Fred Ernst
    Fred Ernst Year ago +1

    and while I am commenting ;-).. at 3:40 you say it is silly that the US could be invaded by Germany. Maybe you froget about the Battle of Britain in 1940 where the UK just was able to stop invasion plans of the Germans by a very small margin. If they had lost that battle the whole war in North Africa would probably not have happened, the war against Russia could have been won in 1941 with all these troops not being used in North Africa. But love your view and also learning a lot about US history :-), thanks again.

    • Jj Abatie
      Jj Abatie 5 months ago

      No its as much an impossibility now as it was then... How many troops would it take to invade the US?? And how many ships would it take to carry them?? And then to keep them supplied as they battled their way across, even if they could establish a toehold to begin with?? Its just not realistic. Ever. By anyone.

    • WatzUpzPeepz
      WatzUpzPeepz 11 months ago +2

      The Battle of Britain was not won by a small margin and Operation Sealion was not a plausible undertaking - admitted by both Hitler and German General Staff during WW2. If even a fanatical and at the time victorious Germany didn't think they could invade the UK - they couldn't invade the UK, let alone the USA.

  • Fred Ernst
    Fred Ernst Year ago +4

    Hi, at 6:30 you talk about the damming of the Mediterranean sea and how it would be impossible to use the land for agriculture. I am from the Netherlands (next to Germany) and we in the Netherlands did just that with the Zuiderzee , making it land usable for agriculture. Just wanted to point that out. The impossible is mostly just possible depending on how bad you want it. . Nobody nows all of history so I hope you see this as a contribution. And thanks for the nice video's.

  • Adammrtl27
    Adammrtl27 Year ago

    The Nazis didn't conquer Germany.. Hitler was elected.
    IF the America was still in the depression, and jobs were scarce, and we weren't making large amount of weapons (military or civilian weapons), people were starving, and things were shitty...
    I just don't see how America would stand on its own. This isnt Cold War era America, with a stockpile of weapons....
    In fact, I don't see why the majority of Americans wouldn't side with Nazi Germany.... As long as you aren't a minority (black, gay, overly religious, disabled..), the Nazis would have brought jobs, money, infrastructure, food, an end to crime...
    Now, I'm not saying I'm a Nazi, but I'm also aware of how the standard of living for the majority of Germans went WAY UP during the prewar era Nazi Germany. It was a short time, mind you, but even when things got really bad, most Germans remained loyal.

  • American Patriot
    American Patriot Year ago +7

    I would truly enjoy the man in the high castle if only it where realistic. In the tv show it says that the Germans don't believe in religion, however this is stupid. 95% of Germans in ww2 where catholic including Hitler. also the idea that Germany would invade the usa and occupy it is mad. all Hitler desired was Europa. there are to many historical inaccuracies to be fun.

    • Not Todd Howard
      Not Todd Howard 6 months ago +3

      We know from the captured leadership and propaganda ministers Hitler had plans to phase Christianity out after the war. They had actually already started tossing shade at the Catholic Church before it ended. You can look it up. We won before it got going but it was something of an open secret at the top of the party the Nazis were planning on phasing out what they saw as a Jewish religion in favor of something else. We don't really know what the something else was since everyone had been told something different but given Nazi Party's obsession with the occult and Nordic Paganism it's possible they might have headed somewhere in that direction.

    • snobby seal
      snobby seal 8 months ago +3

      i would not say 95%, as in 1939 the catholic population was around 40% while around 54% were protestant and another 3-4% "christian" so a high a high number was christian but not all of them were catholic.

  • Roderick Molasar
    Roderick Molasar Year ago

    The poster over the Walgreens on Sunset Boulevard was gigantic.

    SHADOWWOLF77 Year ago +3

    Just started watching first season and I found the resistance almost as hillariously delusional as the US rebels in the TV series Revolution.

  • Drew
    Drew Year ago

    I know this is a year old but you should try to review the plausibility of Fatherland.

  • FarSeeker8
    FarSeeker8 Year ago

    Have we all forgotten that the European Theater of WW2 was started by BOTH Germany AND the USSR? And as I understand it, the USSR was begging the US, after it entered the war, to start a western front/invasion to take the pressure off the Eastern Front.

  • Andrew Davis
    Andrew Davis Year ago

    The invasion of America made more sense in the TV show. Nazis had nukes America didn't. After they nuked DC the American government unconditionally surrendered and ordered the US military to work for the Axis powers. There was a bloody civil war and insurgency but Americans like Smith helped the axis powers crush it.

  • TheLordOfIrony
    TheLordOfIrony Year ago +3

    So are we not going to talk about Canada?

  • futurestoryteller

    So... you're afraid to make a judgement call on the effectiveness of FDR's policies because politics, and present this false neutrality. But you're completely comfortable assessing military, architectural, and irrigational strategies? Then you completely ignore the fact that the Nazis dropped a nuke in the book. I don't get what qualifications you have to talk about the plausibility of alternate histories. - I get it, you don't get an "Alternate History" degree, but I don't even know if you teach history to fifth graders. For all I know you're just this guy going "This seems like something - but not that, yeesh!" Working off of absolutely nothing.

  • Halo4Lyf
    Halo4Lyf Year ago

    "But then again, I live in a timeline where someone who doesn't believe in global warming is being put in charge of the EPA. So what do I know?"
    A great deal, sir, a great deal. Including contemporary geophysics and solar science, all of which points to us currently being in the beginning of a cooling trend, and hasn't detected any actual warming for nearly 20 years. In 20 years time, we're very likely going to be dealing with catastrophic crop failures because the growing period has contracted in major grain-producing regions, and the average global temperature has dropped 2 degrees. I say that as a farmer. Believe me, we're not worried about global warming, we're worried about the opposite, and we live and die by the climate.
    If you are interested in learning about modern geophysics and solar science, I really recommend the work of Lovell, Monckton, and Gavier. Videos of their lectures and presentations can easily be found here in TVclip. :)

    • Not Todd Howard
      Not Todd Howard 6 months ago

      Just going to ignore how climate deniers are building their buildings and rigs up to code *around climate change* huh? No scientists support Global Warming, they support Climate Change. And overall increase to the world's temperature affects ocean currents. This is no sudden shift in dogma, they've been saying it's going to get colder in a lot of places since the 70s. You can attribute it to whatever you want but as long as people are measuring methane and carbon atoms they are going to tell you carbon and methane trap heat. Don't believe it tell me Venus is cold. I got a better question, give me the reason 19 out of every 20 who earned a degree in this shit are drawing the same conclusion. Even the Koch Brothers' study agrees with the consensus.

    • Richard Roberson
      Richard Roberson Year ago

      Halo4Lyf I might check those out.

  • Christopher Ellis
    Christopher Ellis Year ago +3

    I browsed it in the '70s, but found it difficult to get into. Too absurd on many levels

  • zombieLISKlizard
    zombieLISKlizard Year ago +9

    WW2 alternate history in a nutshell: the Nazi's conquer the world, including nations they kinda like such as, Italy, Spain, Argentina, etc.

    ASDFG H Year ago +9

    Make the review of the grasshopper lies heavily.

  • Martin Noutch
    Martin Noutch Year ago +5

    PKD has plenty of my respect for his creativity, but little for his structuring or logic. I feel that in High Castle he kind of just shotgunned reasons and justifications at the story: rather than aiming (or being able?) to make it believable, he just sets so many plates spinning that you are carried along with the story, which is what he was really intending - a chance to explore his reality-slipping mirror of worlds... So the plausibility is really secondary to the social comment and exploration of cultures. The best thing in it, IMO, is the depiction of America as a subservient culture.

    • Jerry Zou
      Jerry Zou 6 months ago

      its easy to judge a book released in the 60s in the 21st century.

  • Marylandbrony
    Marylandbrony Year ago +9

    I actually recall wacthing wacthing a documentary on Atlantropa and the Nazi's actually opposed to project because the architect was a stanch pacifist who wanted to prevent a another European war thru the project.

  • MadM0nte
    MadM0nte 2 years ago +30

    Yeah, I mean I kind of doubt the Soviets would have beaten Germany without the massive amount of lend lease aid they received like a majority of Russian locomotives were American, the U.S. shipped 17.5 million tons of Material to the Soviets more than 50% of which during the crucial years of 1943-44. This was no small contributions either, 2 million tons of food 400,000+ trucks and jeeps around 5,000 Airacobra fighters. The allies were pretty well propped up on the back of American industry.

    • Winston Churchill
      Winston Churchill 3 months ago

      tokigart are you being serious? The Russians literally defeated the Germans in a 1v1 on the eastern front. They were also fighting the Japanese. The Russians were hugely powerful. Just do a quick search up..

    • tokigart
      tokigart 3 months ago

      Loner Simpson god the Soviet would have been conquered so fast what are you high on

    • Winston Churchill
      Winston Churchill 6 months ago

      MadM0nte not necessarily. At the start of the war maybe, but Russia became a powerhouse in mass production. Without America and even Britain the Soviets would have probably won in Europe..

  • SportTalk
    SportTalk 2 years ago +6

    The shadow government, deep state are the Nazis so technically they have won WWII and are covertly running the U.S. in the background. foreground now.

    • bbbf09
      bbbf09 6 months ago

      Right wing tin foil hat muppet! Trump is the very closest think to a Nazi that you could imagine. If the 'deep state' did exist and is currently busy thwarting him then its decidely anti fascist.

    • JUBB 3500
      JUBB 3500 7 months ago +1

      Get back on you meds, you sad, deluded human.

    • Matthews Gaming Zone
      Matthews Gaming Zone 11 months ago

      Marcus W.Right lmao retard

    • Fredinno
      Fredinno Year ago +4

      Marcus W.Right lol conspiracy theorist

  • Colin
    Colin 2 years ago +97

    The most implausible idea in the book is not Germany defeating and occupying the United States, but Germany somehow colonizing Mars by 1962, which is literally not possible.

    • johnmburt1960
      johnmburt1960 5 months ago

      +goose e Citation, please.

    • goose e
      goose e 5 months ago

      Why is colonizing mars not possible? Bc you believe everything your told? Do you really think the secret military space programs tell you anything? I gurantee there were colonies on mars now and prolly 50 years ago

    • Alice Wonderland
      Alice Wonderland 6 months ago

      That was to Colin - he said "the most implausible part of the movies was Germany somehow colonizing Mars by 1962, which is literally not possible." Wondered if he thought it plausible in the current America to have landed on the moon by 1969.

    • johnmburt1960
      johnmburt1960 6 months ago

      *+Alice Wonderland* America landing on the Moon on what timeline? What America?

    • Alice Wonderland
      Alice Wonderland 6 months ago

      How do you feel about America landing on the moon by 1969?

  • CdW
    CdW 2 years ago +7

    My question would be, why should the Nazis (or Japan) invade the USA ? To me it seems a very american thing, this fear of invasion. If USA could have stayed neutral or dropped out of the war, there would be no need of invasion and if the USA fought on...the Nazis would simply lose the war. Or Japan, the same thing, the reason for the attack on Pearl Harbor wasn't to stage an invasion on the west coast, the goal was to take out the US pacific fleet. Japans goal was to establish their Co-Prosperity Spehre (people allways seem to forget that the most south asian countries were allready occupied by europen powers and not independent nations). The only thing I could imagine is that after an american defeat, the USA would maybe become more pro Nazi and a american pro-Nazi Persident would come into power or the development of an alternate cold war.

  • mudgetheexpendable
    mudgetheexpendable 2 years ago +5

    Always wondered why PKD didn't include the factual German-American Bund and Fascist League of North America (Italian equivalent) as more significant players in the run-up to the invasion (snort) of the US. Absent FDR's personal power and his ramming through Congress of the New Deal, worsening economic conditions without an inspiring leader to kiss it better would soften up the desperate for a combination of charity funded by the resurgent German economy's rents. Then tying of this ethnically targeted charity to an evangelical sociopolitical outreach to the tens of millions of German and Italian Americans. Better Fascist planning, heavier monetary investment, gets them on the ground quislings with political activism in their bones.

  • Petra Meyer
    Petra Meyer 2 years ago

    You should correct the statement to "How US Americans think WW II went". We are quite aware where the main front and fighting was.

  • Martin Burch
    Martin Burch 2 years ago +6

    I've authored a novel -- sci fi, romance, and real history mixed with althistory -- whereby the Italians beat the British in WW2. I know, plausibility matters but I came up with a scenario that works. No small task! I'm in the final edit and it will be up on Amazon later this month. I don't want to shamelessly plug it on your channel but I would like your opinion of it. If you're amenable. I won't spam you.

  • Richard Feldman
    Richard Feldman 2 years ago +2

    TV series is awesome but to think that Germany could have won a world war with multiple fronts is just insane. Even with the Nuke the Germans would have eventually lost due to attrition if for no other reason. As you pointed out Russians were not planning on stopping any time soon and we didn’t even bring in the fact that Germany spreads thru the entire world by 1962 really? Nuke or not many feel that DC is the heart of the United States I would disagree with this assertion. DC is the problem not the solution with any type fighting that may go on. American people are and always will be the heart and soul of this country along with their faith. The people are its heart and can see America having much more Robust guerrilla warfare than what the series portray. You dont own property and as you pointed out a landing would have been much more complicated for the Germans.

  • Fricis Rumnieks
    Fricis Rumnieks 2 years ago +21

    Wasn't the destruction of Washington the main reason why Axis won? That's at least how I imagined it. US didn't had nuclear weapons, since in the real world, scientists from German areas were crucial to actually make the A-bomb more than just a theoretical concept. So with Axis winning - US don't have A-bombs either, and Germany is the first to do it actually.

    • OolTube02
      OolTube02 8 months ago +2

      Or if Hitler had access to alternative history newsreels, seeing the possibility of nukes with his own eyes...

    • Brian B.
      Brian B. Year ago

      The problem here is that the reason so many German physicists went to the US is:
      1) Many of them, including Albert Einstein himself, were Jewish and therefore persecuted by the Nazis directly.
      2) Even the ones that weren't Jewish were not taken very seriously by the Nazis, because the Nazis thought of theoretical physics as "Jewish" due to the aforementioned involvement of many Jewish scientists, and preferred their own, completely bullshit, "Deustch Physik".
      Or in other words, the Nazis could have developed the atom bomb if and only if they weren't Nazis.

  • Doug M
    Doug M 2 years ago +1

    No one thought it was possible for the the Germans to sweep through France in 1940 yet that's exactly what they did. Predicting the outcome of battles is fraught with danger. There's some truth to the phrase stranger than fiction. If Hitler had reallocated resources in a timely manner Philip K Dick's vision may have been a long shot but possibly plausible. There are so many variables.

  • jeso317
    jeso317 2 years ago +21

    I find it funny I never thought of a well armed American civilian population as a defence . that is another huge hurdle the Germans would have.

    • Thomas Solonyetski
      Thomas Solonyetski 3 months ago

      +Runcibus Arse-Weasel Man you're a fucking idiot.

    • Michael T
      Michael T 3 months ago

      +Runcibus Arse-Weasel Yeah. There is guerrilla warfare which Americans would be great at

    • JUBB 3500
      JUBB 3500 7 months ago

      In the book and series they do figure in, but just like in Nazi occupied Europe in actual history, an internal resistance can only do much against a fully equipped and ruthless dictatorship.

    • Alex Conner
      Alex Conner Year ago +9

      Runcibus Arse-Weasel If a bunch of uneducated and poor afgans can give the most powerful military in the world endless problems then I'm sure a country full of seasoned combat veterans who served in the most powerful and advanced military in the world can spearhead a insurgency and give any military lots of problems.

    • Richard Roberson
      Richard Roberson Year ago +4

      Runcibus Arse-Weasel look at veitnam and also have you ever been to a gun show in America?

  • GDS Pathe
    GDS Pathe 2 years ago

    May I recommend you do a review on the Anglo American Nazi war

    • GDS Pathe
      GDS Pathe 2 years ago

      it's uh dystopic Paris berlin and Nuremberg get well you see

    • Jamie McIntosh
      Jamie McIntosh 2 years ago

      Umm, pardon me, but I was interested in when you were thinking of attending to the e-books of Sea Lion Press. I plan to be reading the books by January next year.

    • The Alternate Historian
      The Alternate Historian  2 years ago

      Would love to. I will add it to the list, but can't promise when I will get around to it.

  • LEPhant5
    LEPhant5 2 years ago +1

    Love your perspective!

  • Jamie McIntosh
    Jamie McIntosh 2 years ago +2

    Are you going to record a Plausibility Review of the Draka series and "The Years of Rice and Salt" and other alternative historical novels?

  • TheLobstersoup
    TheLobstersoup 2 years ago +2

    What bothers me is that everyone - including the writer(s) of the show take the books' meaning literally. It's how you start out reading it, but the more you get in depth you realize (or should realize) that this is a book with a much more powerful meaning: the writer can shape reality and the pen is mightier than the sword. This came to me first when I realized that Abendsen (in the book) wasn't the underground dwelling superforce as depicted by the Nazis in the book. He was in reality just a common man, living in a normal house (no high castle) and throwing dinner parties. His demise would not matter to the outcome of the story, since he'd already finished his alternative history book "the grasshopper lies heavy", which would change the world and set things right.
    To me it wasn't ever about how accurate the technology was depicted, but instead about how people would suffer by being placed in highly collective and opressive forms of government. How no art could flourish, because it was supressed artificially, yet art would still be recognized by people as something inherently beautiful. Frank F(r)ink in the novel was foremost an artist and a romantic, while in the TV-show he is a rebel and assassin. I think they went sideways from the original meaning of this very beautiful book and made it into a common story of struggle, supression and lots of drama. It is intersting, but just like this review it focuses more on plausibility than on its metaphorical meaning.
    So far, I've seen a mix of P.K. Dick ideas thrown together to create something new. To me this method can never succeed, because if lacks the originality and the surprise we sometimes suffer at the turns of a P.K.Dick story. It's well crafted and decently written, but the show so far only manages to scratch superficially upon all the questions raised in the book. And it completely ignores the role of an artist in such a society, which was - in my opinion - the whole point of the original novel.

  • Todd Feigenbaum
    Todd Feigenbaum 2 years ago +11

    Great analysis...though, history is littered with implausible scenarios that became reality...a rebellion in North America defeating the greatest army of its time during the American Revolution, Trump becoming president, etc. A few key mistakes by the Allies, some lucky breaks and a nuclear strike on a weakened United States and I could see Germany squeezing out a victory. It would be long, tough and quite the slog...but still.

    • Chris Gibson
      Chris Gibson 4 months ago

      The British army was not the greatest army of its time.
      The traditions of no or little tax and the dislike of a standing army meant that the British lacked sufficient troops and the war effort therefore required German auxilaries, the support of American loyalists, native peoples and ironically the French Canadians.
      Dan Snow's book Death or Victory sets the stage for the Revolution and is an entertaining read and comprehensively researched.
      It ends with Montcalm's prediction that Britain would never have sufficient troops to maintain control over liberty loving America once the defeat of France removed the threat in the north.

    • 9822703
      9822703 7 months ago +1

      the colonists did not defeat Britain on their own. lets not forget without big allies and the training and equipment provided, the United Colonies would have lost.

    • JUBB 3500
      JUBB 3500 7 months ago

      I disagree. Nuclear bombs on improved, 1947 V2 missiles and BLAMMO!

    • Richard Roberson
      Richard Roberson Year ago

      It makes perfect sense the Us won there revolution

    • Todd Feigenbaum
      Todd Feigenbaum 2 years ago +4

      In retrospect you're probably right...Nazi Germany struggled to invade the UK, a mere handful of miles from occupied France...the Japanese was engaged in land wars in Asia, to extend their limited military might across the Pacific would be silly... From additional reading, the best the Germans hoped for from WW II was occupation of Europe with no plans ever to invade the US...the best the Japanese hoped for was domination of the Pacific Theater. So you're probably many ways the war was lost for the Axis well before Pearl Harbor.

  • Albert Barnett
    Albert Barnett 2 years ago

    I have thoroughly enjoyed Amazon's depiction of the man in the High Castle. While alternate history writings may or may not be plausible, it's what it is, an avenue of discovery of character interaction and the creative mind of Philip K. Dick! Concerning FDR and the great society, I agree that he prolonged the depression, and there is evidence of this possibility in that the first great depression< a/> was worse yet not prolonged by a good conservative capitalist who chose to allow those who failed to suffer the consequences and allow the market to correct it self, quickly through the level headed administration of Calvin Coolidge the other great depression was thwarted. He cut government in half, thus freeing people of the undue burden of high taxation and public interference in the free market, he allowed the rich to hold the burdens of their poor investments an allowed the american people off the hook through taxation! This was the great mistake that George Bush made we have to "destroy the free market to save it", what an ignoramus, all he did was destroy the dollar, burden the taxpayers with failures of others, and run up the national debt to unprecedented height's, then along comes the Marxist Obama and doubles it again. Our current debt is destroying the fabric of the nation and will bring it down just as the Marxist in Venezuela have done to their economy. We can never pay off our debt!!!! I am not being hyperbolic! It is simply impossible to pay off our current debt without massive government cuts in welfare of every kind, something never likely to happen since votes are bought with promises of hand outs by politicians. The only alternative is massive inflation, like Venezuela. Also the video blogger is crazy, Global Warming is myth, a scare tactic by progressives to separate you from your freedom and wallet, a scheme that has work exceedingly well for the father of scare mongers "Al Gore". Believe it at your own risk!!!

  • Charles the Movie Guy
    Charles the Movie Guy 2 years ago +50

    It actually could be possible to takeover America if Nazi germany built nuclear weapons first like it was in the STORYS PLOT

    • CorbCorbin
      CorbCorbin 6 months ago

      Not Todd Howard
      That's why some find alt history, more plausible, than others do.
      It's Science Fiction, and ridiculous scenarios, to put yourself in a position that other nations, actually went through.
      The Man in the High Castle, is high concept, but not really supposed to be plausible.
      It's a very alternate world, as if the Multiverse theory is real and proven, where the U.S. just isn't the powerhouse it was when Hitler came to power.

    • Not Todd Howard
      Not Todd Howard 6 months ago

      It actually wouldn't. The US and UK had something called "Operation Unthinkable", A plan to attack the Soviets right after WWII ended which the US refused to even attempt on the bases that what nukes the US had would not stop the Soviet offensive. The operation required the Allies to immediately re-militarized Germany to make up for the power difference. This was at a time when the US had a fuck ton more material needed for nuclear fission then the Reich had at it's peak yet they still thought winning would be a up to a coin flip. In such a scenario the Soviets could take a nuclear armed Germany alone, let alone with the rest of the allies.
      Furthermore, this tends to get ignored because (muh what if scenarios), but despite what the History Channel tells you between episodes of Ancient Aliens and Ice Road Truckers the Nazi Party did not believe in relativity or it's implications about mass and energy. They labeled it Jewish science. What little of a program they had was largely dead before Stalingrad. It couldn't happen. Nazi Germany wasn't even in a position to invade the British Isle for the entirety of the war, how the fuck were they going to cross the Atlantic and invade the Americas?

    • David Rosenfield
      David Rosenfield Year ago +1

      Александар Матић, it's conceivable that if German rocket capability continued from its 1944 trajectory, they would have rockets capable of hitting the East Coast US by 1947. Probably launched from ships in the mid-Atlantic, but in this timeline the Germans would have total naval dominance.
      In the OTL 1944 V2s launched from Germany could hit England. The Allies had no defense against this, only counterattack. In this timeline there is no counterattack. German rockets are purely a terror weapon, not militarily strategic. But terror to wear down the enemy's political resolve was certainly part of the Nazi playbook (see the Blitz).
      A transatlantic invasion is ludicrous. It simply wasn't logically possible to get men and materiel to US shores, not to mention subdue and govern a nation that large.
      Ignoring the question of why the Nazis would even be interested in conquest of North America, it might be possible to install a puppet regime:
      1. Back a fascist political movement within the US that waved flags and Bibles, promising the economic miracle and glory of Germany. They would root out Communist and Jewish forces within America that were keeping the nation down, and put good Christian white people in their manifestly destined place in the sun. (Excuse me while I vomit.)
      2. Somehow use nuclear rockets to encourage the existing US government to surrender to the fascists. I'm not sure how you gain sympathy with American citizens by nuking Washington, however.
      I guess, TL;DR
      1. Back fascist American movement
      2. Nuke non-fascist America
      3. ????
      4. Victory?
      Still kinda implausible.

    • Adammrtl27
      Adammrtl27 Year ago

      Madalin Grama dude. A resistance effort?... Right, cause Europe had one in our real timeline, and although they were helpful to the allies, they didn't really do much on their own.
      Why do you think America would fight back? What would they fight with? A massive stockpile of post war arms... Nope, that doesn't exist in the books timeline.

    • FarSeeker8
      FarSeeker8 Year ago +1

      Mexican assistance to the US resistance is questionable, given Mexico's general dislike of "the gringo." The Nazis might have inticed Mexican assistance against the US in exchange for previously lost territory (similar to the Zimmermann Telegram of WW1). The Germans at that point would know they could always take the territory back.
      Rumnieks is also right, in that the US would not have been as well prepared, or the Germans as damaged *without* the US being in action in Europe (look at what they did enter the war with: the M5, M3 Lee, _P- etc.) and . Without Pearl Harbor attack showing America's over-confidence, the German U-boat fleet would have had an easy time dealing with the Atlantic fleet. Even the British were slow in learning how to deal with u-boats, as was seen when the "U-47 penetrated the British base at Scapa Flow and sank the old battleship HMS Royal Oak at anchor." (WIkipedia)
      The Germans might not have needed the a-bomb if they had innovated and created a V-1 or rocket (e.g: V-2) launching "aircraft carrier." And considering the rejection of such an idea of jets by the US military (e.g: The Lockheed L-133), the Germans, with their jet planes (e.g: ME-262, AR 234, etc.), would make easy work of American aircraft.
      And Russia, without lend-lease, would have had a much harder time even slowing the Nazi's advance on the Eastern front.

  • Step Back History
    Step Back History 2 years ago +38

    Is it just me, or does a lot of alternate history scenarios coming from a conservative desire to justify their own hunches?

    • Grace Conlin
      Grace Conlin 28 days ago

      No, it's just you

    • Robert Gill
      Robert Gill 2 years ago +4

      Odd that you have a WPA sign in the video, and say that John Garner's politics were too conservative to allow this. The book's talk about Americana kitsch includes talk of a WPA mural--something impossible under Garner. It makes me wonder if Philip K. Dick was unaware of Garner's conservative leanings.
      And despite what you said, I believe the book does mention an attack on Pearl Harbor, but one where the bulk of the U.S. Pacific fleet was bottled up there, and destroyed by Japan. (This makes no sense under isolationism.)
      You're not alone in being unable to figure out what an author's political bias is; when I first heard of Philip Roth's The Plot Against America, specifically, the part about a pre-WWII Lindbergh, a major American celebrity visiting Germany and speaking favorably about it, my initial reaction (given how close the Iraq War was to the release of the book) was that it was a jab at modern celebrities such as Susan Sarandon and Sean Penn visiting Iraq prior to the war and attracting all sorts of questions about their patriotism. As I was not aware that Roth's politics were left of center (which tells you how much of his literature I have to familiarize myself with), I thought The Plot Against America was a conservative partisan jab at such people.

    • The Alternate Historian
      The Alternate Historian  2 years ago +20

      Interesting question. May I recommend Altered Pasts: Counterfactuals in History by Richard Evans. He tackles the issue of conservative "wish fulfillment", but from the perspective of counterfactual history which is the scholarly side of alternate history. Still worth a read though as many of his critiques can easily apply to alternate history (although he gets way too much credit for coming up with commentary that has already been written down before). That said, for the sake of argument, I think its very hard to completely remove an author's bias from any alternate history. Its rare you see someone write something that completely undermines the ideological underpinning of their beliefs. For example, referring back to the New Deal, those who think the program was necessary are more likely to write a story where America is worse off without it, while those who think the New Deal did more harm then good would present an alternate history where America is better off without it (although no particular examples of this in fiction come to mind). Occasionally an author will write a character that is unlike themselves on certain issues (such as an author who is pro-gun control, but writes a protagonist who uses a gun), but you probably will always sense some bias from the book overall. That said, I admit I'm bad at identifying which direction the bias leans to. I honestly thought Eric Flint was conservative after reading many of the 1632 books until I learned he was a life long socialist during the Sad/Rabid Puppies fiasco.

  • jonathan lavezzi
    jonathan lavezzi 2 years ago

    Really is a great alternate history book makes you ask a lot of what if's I feel even you suspend believe up till the point of invasion of north America the industrial might of the country would kick into high gear before you could even get a significant footprint. Also as in the book I wonder how much the development of nuclear weapons would change the outcome. It would obviously be a race of who develops them first.