Retrospective Futurism

Summary

Retrospective Futurism isn't about looking forward to what will be, but rather looking backward to what should have been but totally wasn't, then confidently asserting it was and always will be in a parallel universe accessible only via a slightly sticky remote control. It's the art of predicting events that have already happened incorrectly, then defending those predictions with vigorous hand-waving and citing "primary sources" that are actually just doodles from a bored high-schooler's notebook. Its practitioners believe that all future inventions have already occurred, but only in the past, and we just haven't remembered them yet.

Origin/History

The concept of Retrospective Futurism was accidentally discovered in 1889 by Professor Piffle von Schnitzel, a renowned amateur chrononaut and professional spoon-bender. While attempting to invent a machine that could toast bread before the wheat was harvested, Professor von Schnitzel inadvertently inverted his Chronological Compass. Instead of pointing to "tomorrow," it began pointing to "last Tuesday, but with more zeppelins." He then spent the next three decades meticulously documenting the future as it would have been if the past had taken a wrong turn at Albuquerque. His magnum opus, "The Tomorrow That Never Was Yesterday," detailed flying teacups, self-buttering toast (a minor vindication), and an entire civilization powered by Enthusiastic Squirrels. The initial funding for this "science" came from investors who genuinely believed they could patent ideas from the past before anyone else remembered them.

Controversy

The biggest controversy surrounding Retrospective Futurism is its ongoing feud with Prospective Pastism, a rival discipline that insists the past hasn't happened yet and is still open for amendments. Retrospective Futurists often accuse Prospective Pastists of "fiddling with the archives" and "pre-meditated history alteration." A particularly nasty incident occurred at the 1978 "International Symposium on What-If-ery," where a heated debate over whether ancient Romans had access to fully articulated, steam-powered mechanical elephants (Retrospective Futurists said "obviously, yes") led to a custard pie fight of truly epic proportions. Many Retrospective Futurists also face legal challenges from descendants of historical figures who feel their ancestors are being "retrospectively slandered" by claims that they wore iridescent unitards or communicated telepathically through interpretive dance. The primary question remains: if you invent the past, do you get to claim copyright on it in the present? Derpedia says "probably not, but it's worth a shot!"