A Review Of A People’s History Of

A Review of A People’s History of
The United States

A People’s History of the United States concentrates on the personal experiences

and struggles of people who lived in the United States from 1492-present. It is a view of

history from the common man’s perspective, rather than the view of the leaders and

upper class of this country.

The book revolves around the views of history from the oppressed point of view.

Howard Zinn makes it clear from the beginning that he will value the views and

experiences of the oppressed over the view of the oppressor. He describes the conquest

from the point of view of the Native American population. He describes slavery in the

south from the point of view of the slave. He describes industrialization from the point of

view of the workers on the shop floor. He describes World War II from the point of view

of the soldiers on the front lines. He describes the Vietnam War from the point of

view of the Vietnamese. You have to realize that these are his views of history as he sees

them, and is only one side of the story.

There is no such thing as unbiased, balanced, truthful history. History is in the eye

of the teller. In this case, Howard Zinn’s view of the history of this great country is

extremely Marxist. He seems to pick and choose historical data that fits his agenda in an

attempt to evoke an emotional response from the reader. He does make some good points

pertaining to injustices and misconceptions regarding the idealistic view of history, but

unrealistic perceptions are made of the founding and progress of this country. You have

to ask yourself, which is more important, that Columbus made his way to America or

that he treated the Indians horribly when he got here ? Which is more important,

that the Declaration of Independence states, that “all men are created equal” or the fact

that the author of the Declaration owned hundreds of slaves?

Zinn seems to argue that we cannot end evils like genocide, exploitation, and

abuse until we “face” them ... drag them into the light of day. To that point we are in

complete agreement. But, the very heart of Zinn\'s “history” is distorted. To use the two

most obvious examples; he condemns Columbus for genocide and America for slavery.

However, on the genocidal religious practices of Native Americans and on the African

elements of the international black slave trade, Zinn is virtually silent. That silence is a

crime of sorts. It is a crime because it distorts the truth rather than advances it and justice

cannot be had by any means other than the truth. If Zinn wants justice he needs to face

the truth and to face it he has to be willing to look for it. In my opinion he has attempted

nothing of the sort in this book.

Zinn\'s interpretation of the motivations of the founders with respect to the

Constitution and the Bill of Rights are inaccurate. For example, if you knew nothing

about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, Zinn would have you believe that they were

merely the results of a clever ploy by the rich landowners. To “buy” enough support from

the middle class to assure continuation of the system that kept the rich, wealthy. You

would not know that these documents and the ideas they reflect have been profoundly

important not only in the United States, but also throughout the world.

In my opinion his history of the Cold War is wrong as well. In reading about the

Cold War, one would emerge from Zinn\'s account believing that the U.S. government

had driven the arms race throughout the 1970s and 1980s. In his view the Soviets, it

seems, had no role in all of this. Zinn fails to mention that after the end of the Cold War,

what emerged from Soviet and then Russian sources strongly corroborated most of the

United States views on the Cold War. The Soviet missiles were real; they’re potential to

conquer Europe with their massive army was real as well. They’re military expenditures

were, in fact, much higher in terms of the burden they