De toekomst is geschiedenis – De terugkeer van het totalitaire Rusland

The book uses personal histories to illustrate broader political shifts. I'm curious how much of this was shaped by the author's choices versus the source material.

The focus on individual lives makes the political history feel more tangible. Wondering if this approach was planned from the start or evolved during research.

The book's portrayal of the resurgence of totalitarian practices made me think about current events. I'd love to hear how others felt about the parallels.