Many of the apocalyptic scenarios were intended to be of a world-altering nature. In many cases, they were so over the top that even those writing them did not believe it would come to pass. These books often have a second wave of books by the same author or one related to it, which describe the collapse of civilization and the rise of barbarism. Those second wave books tended to be shorter, as they deal more directly with the barbarism of the world rather than with the rebuilding of civilization. In this case, it was the rise of the Soviet Union which, for most of the world, represented the collapse of civilization. However, for the Middle East and other nations at risk, it was the British Empire. Some described how the British Empire had been overthrown in Africa, and others described what happened when it had attempted to invade Russia. If you're trying to write that kind of story, you have to be aware of what has already been done. It's difficult to write about something that's been created by a major writer (or several of them) that has already been explored at length. The advantage of your having been involved in a different apocalyptic event is that you might be able to come up with something different. You can get into writing about how everything that's happening now could have been predicted by a person writing sixty years ago. That would be completely new. It's also likely that when the nuclear wars do occur, they will be fought between more than two sides. How would you write about that? **W. S. Di Piero:** You write about that in _End Times_ in the third section entitled "The Second American Civil War." This section is a much-abbreviated version of a book I was working on that I was never able to finish, because so many people died and so much was destroyed. The section is called "A Time of Death and Rebirth." It's a description of how the United States will go into total civil war, and of how the two groups involved in the war will fight, and of how horrible and surreal it will be. It's just like a bad war movie. It's all very violent, but there's nothing in it that hasn't already been done. It's just that when things happen in our world, they're so bad and so real, that people think there can't be anything more. **RC:** The Civil War—American Civil War—was a horrible war, the result of deep differences between groups. The same is true now, but there are so many other ways to die, that the deaths of millions of Americans is almost a drop in the bucket. War and economic collapse are the least of what we can see ahead. Another thing that I remember from that book was the idea that you were trying to create a scenario where the USA and China would collide into each other, but also collide with the rest of the world. Was that more recently? **WS:** Yes, in the second section of the book. The main character is a retired military officer who lives in Hawaii and works at an observatory. He has a satellite communications system. His job, it turns out, is that of a communication liaison between his country and a group of people who have been on a starship. His job is to transmit their thoughts and ideas to the rest of the world, and through the television and his satellite TV station, he becomes a world celebrity. He becomes famous around the world. He is suddenly thrust into the front rank of international politics, and he is in the center of great events that bring other countries to their knees. He is not only the communication liaison but also a military man in disguise. He is being used by the alien leaders to lead their own people into a war with America, but he's a double agent. He's a double agent for America, and he is using this position to sabotage them. He is fighting a battle on two fronts, and he doesn't realize that he is the key to both of them. He is the spark of a world war in which countries are dropping nuclear bombs in an attempt to fight a war with America, and it's because he is so popular that they're doing it. In the meantime, he finds himself increasingly at odds with his own country as it descends into barbarism. **RC:** This sounds like a fascinating scenario, and I hope you wrote it. **WS:** I wish I had. It was all there. All of it. **RC:** You have also written, with William F. Nolan, a book called _Lions of Judah: A Jewish Apocalyptic Future and the Coming Age_ , about the Jewish apocalyptic idea and the possibility that the end of the world might actually begin with the Jews and end up with the Jews. What is your current position on the idea that there will be a messiah of some sort who will defeat the forces of evil, and how that might be portrayed? **WS:** As a Jewish person, I find this idea rather absurd, although I have no idea what Jews themselves believe. For example, they have two words, or one word in Hebrew, for messiah. The way the word is translated into English is like the word _savior_. We would say Jesus Christ. This is a very strong word and seems to be a very strong idea. When it comes to messianic figures, I can never understand what is meant by it. I don't know why people seem to feel that human beings will have a messiah. In some Eastern religions, we have the idea of an avatar, which is some kind of divine being who is more or less human and has some kind of superhuman powers that we as humans cannot have. In order to communicate with him, we need to be in the same condition. We have to become gods to communicate with him, which can be done in a few different ways. It depends on the religion and how well the religions are understood. I would be very much in favor of an avatar who represented the idea of enlightened humanity, like Kwan Yin, the deity who rules over China. My own view is that humans should not be gods. I don't see why we have to be, but the way it seems to work out, when a messiah comes, that's what's expected of humans. **RC:** That's very interesting, because there are many people today who think that the messiah will come because we have lost our way. The problem with that idea is that you would want the messiah to represent all the best things about the human race. **WS:** Exactly, but we already have someone in office, and they don't seem to be doing such a good job. What we're expecting, of course, is to get someone who is more powerful than the governments in the world and is going to make a mess. As long as they do a good job, that will be what we want. But that's why I say that these concepts have to be rethought. **RC:** Many religions and most eschatological books seem to depend upon violence for the final solution. It's as if those in power want that so they can remain in power. Can you speak to this concept of political power and who benefits from it? **WS:** It's certainly been one of the big themes in American literature, where we know that the big war is at the end of the world. In some religions, we have the idea that at the end of the world we will be given a choice. We will have to make a decision whether or not to go on with the current form of life or to go on to something new. Many of these religions seem to place great importance on war, sometimes to the point of making it eternal. I've noticed that in the Muslim religion, for example, they have a concept that says if we have a war, and you don't pray three times a day, or three times in the last hours of the day, then you will go to hell for it. I think that shows that war is seen as important. I think this comes out of a very tribal mentality that really has no place in the larger, more realistic perspective. This is especially the case when we begin talking about the Middle East. **RC:** It seems that both the Arab nations and the Israelis have a great need for the idea of the messiah who will come and destroy their enemies. Even a person as knowledgeable and moderate as Ehud Barak made it clear in the 1990s that if the Israelis don't have such a messiah, they are doomed. This may be something that we need to discuss in a dialogue with leaders in the Middle East. If such a messiah does not arrive, there are very serious problems with the survival of their state. **WS:** Absolutely. The messiah is someone who is above the ordinary human being. The messiah must be someone who can defeat the people who are the cause of the problem, the oppressors. In the Bible, we read about someone who was the embodiment of that quality. He was Jesus, the Messiah. In order to be an appropriate savior, he had to be without sin, and Jesus was able to be that person. When his enemies came against him, they were defeated and rendered helpless in his hands. He did away with their power, even though he could have destroyed them. In Islam, there is a similar idea, the Mahdi, who is seen as a messianic figure. Like Jesus, he will appear at a time of great crisis when Islam is under attack. According to Islam