This is a very hard question. The first question is...is history necessary, as in "it can't be another way"? Individual freedom asides, does collective freedom exist? I mean collective freedom as in "people choosing history", not as in "liberal state".

I am not sure, but I am closer to thinking of current history as a natural consequence of past actions. For example, I am firmly against war in Iraq, but given the situation brought on by the 11-S, such war is rather predictable, Bush or no Bush. I am also against terrorism, but if we look at the current international situation, I find the existance of such violence completly natural: I may have been surprised at the 11-S, but thinking coldly, it was something that was meant to happen sooner or later. And the current situation is a consequence of a past situation, Cold War, wich I feel natural if we look at how the world was left organized after World War II. Was Nazi Germany necessary? (Necessary as in "it could not have been in another way") Given the German situation after WWI, I believe - Hitler or not- the rise of nazism looks very probable. Was WWI necessary? Well, I could go back as much as I want to, and all the disasters we call "history" seem to be tied to previous disasters, and to be natural consequences of such happenings. Thnings don't occur out of nothing, and history is more than just a bunch of events: it is a gigantic web.

So yes, I doubt we can really choose, I doubt it really depends so much on people. Maybe a part affects, but I am closer to believing we are not as free as we think we are in facts contemplated from a distant point of view. Yay, I'm a damn fatalist.