How Did Howard Zinn Wrote A People's History Of The United States

1. Zinn’s main purpose for writing A People’s History of the United States is to show history from the viewpoint of others.

Zinns general thesis is that history is often misconstrued, omitted, or twisted to serve certain purposes, he uses this specific chapter about Columbus

His other authority comes from Mark Twain, who he informs us was “called a ‘traitor’ for criticizing the U.S. invasion of the Phillipines” (160). Zinn quotes Twain when he says “‘[we] have thrown away the

In chapter four of A History of the United States by Howard Zinn, he explored the condition and state of the English colonies concerning the American Revolution. He implored on how the American Revolution successfully supplanted the tyrannical system of England with the same kind of tyranny. He continued expanding on all components of the American Revolution such as what led to the rebellion and dissatisfaction of the people and how after the American Revolution, nothing had really changed other than who became the current puppet master.

2. By assigning both, The People’s History of the United States, and A Patriot’s History of the United States, it allows us to take a look at two different views of American history. Howard Zinn, the author of The People’s History of the United States, seems to tell the story from the view of those not in power, like those in slavery, women, and Native Americans. Conversely, the authors of A Patriot’s History of the United States, Larry Schweikart and

Poor people had always been the backbone of the U.S. Their contribution to building America has always been overlooked. Rich people look upon the lower class with distaste, calling the unfortunate ones, “savages.” This is why Zinn named Chapter 3 of his book, “People’s History,” “Persons of Mean and Vile Conditions.” He wanted to shed light on those who were taken advantage of while history was in the making— the slaves, the poor people, the Indians also known as the “persons of Mean and Vile Conditions,” in the eyes of the wealthy. Since the rich does not want to be categorized with the poor, they have several techniques and strategies to maintain the status quo where the rich white people were on top of the social pyramid, the poor blacks and Indians on the bottom. For example, some of the techniques are to prohibit interracial marriage between the blacks and whites so “that the white population could remain ‘pure’ and in control.” (Zinn 35), “Negroes were forbidden to carry any arms while the white….would get muskets……the distinctions of status between white and black servants became more and more clear.” (Zinn 56) Authors of history textbooks, traditional historians, and politicians will definitely argue about the assertions made by Howard Zinn. They will say something similar to, “Zinn is unpatriotic.” But isn’t it unpatriotic to call the people whose back the U.S. was built upon, “persons of mean and vile conditions”?

Public consensus, similar to politics, varies greatly when it comes to American history, especially as it pertains to the classroom. Views about the content and historical interpretation included in history texts have reached a heightened polarization in recent years. This can be seen in the vast differences between the diatribes of Howard Zinn’s, A People’s History of the United States, and Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen’s, A Patriot’s History of the United States. While both books, prescribed by this introductory course into American History, cover many of the same topics, they clearly paint different pictures. I feel that any text seeking to represent a responsible survey of a

In the reading, Columbus, the Indians, and Human Progress, Howard Zinn explains how human progress and genocide are interrelated. In fact, he states that many civilizations have used genocide as one of the most efficient tools to promote the progress of human society. Zinn defends his position regarding this subject by means of the exemplification of how the Europeans discovered and conquered the American territory; for example, Christopher Columbus intimidated and enslaved the Arawaks in the same way that “Cortes did to the Aztecs, Pizarro to the Incas and the English settlers to the Powhatans and the Pequots” (Zinn 11). In all these cases, the colonizers took by force the Indians’ riches.

Zinn’s writing of racism during slavery showed the truth about the malevolent side of America. Zinn agreed with Schweikart that slavery started due to starvation of the settlers, and the need for workers to grow cash crops for profit. He also had similar views that African slaves were easier to control than white servants and Indians as well. The description of the sufferings of the slaves brought to America in 1619 was more severe and accurate than what Schweikart had described, evident from personal accounts and experiences of hardships. For example, a document described that the slaves received mistreatment even before arriving in America because many would die from suffocation inside the crowded ship. In Zinn’s writing, the theme of Peopling

Why acknowledge history? The solution is because we essentially must to achieve access to the laboratory of human involvement. In the essay “Haunted America”, Patricia Nelson takes a truly various and remarkably gallant stance on United States history. Through the recounting of the White/Modoc war in “Haunted America,” she brings to light the complexity and confusion of the White/Indian conflicts that is often missing in much of the history we read. Her account of the war, with the faults of both Whites and Indians revealed, is an unusual alternative to the stereotypical “Whites were good; Indians were bad” or the reverse stand point that “Indians were good; Whites were bad” conclusions that many historians reach. Limerick argues that a very brutal and bloody era has been simplified and romanticized, reducing the lives and deaths of hundreds to the telling of an uncomplicated story of “Good Guys” and “Bad Guys”.

Howard Zinn is a professor of political science in Boston University and Gordon S. Wood is a history professor at Brown University. These two historians viewed the nature of American Revolution from two opposite different perspectives. Zinn viewed the American Revolution as an effort to preserve America’s status; while Wood looked at Revolution as an event that incorporated sense of equality among all Americans. Zinn was able to present the argument better as evidences he provided to support his argument seemed to make more sense and were closer to reality.

A Peoples History of the United States was written by Howard Zinn. Zinn’s main purpose for writing this book was to give a precise and detailed exposition of American History from the victim’s point of view. “I prefer to try to tell the story of the discovery of America from the viewpoint of the Arawaks, of the Constitution from the standpoint of the slaves…” He wants to uncover hidden episodes of the past, be skeptical about the government and even talk about the cruelties the victims put on each other because of their oppressors. He wants to understand why the oppressors killed the victims and how these victims felt and what actions they took. Zinn wants to tell history’s greatest achievement from the point of view of the people who get slaughtered, robbed, taunted and anything else that happened to the victims while

Later on in A People’s History of the United States, Zinn questions whether “all this bloodshed and deceit – from Columbus to Cortez, Pizarro, the Puritans – [was] a necessity for the human race to progress from savagery to civilization.” Zinn

Zinn once remarked, “Objectivity is impossible and it is also undesirable. That is, if it were possible it would be undesirable, because if you have any kind of a social aim, if you think history should serve society in some way; should serve the progress of the human race; should serve justice in some way, then it requires that you make your selection on the basis of what you think will advance causes of humanity” (Flynn). It is pretty clear to the reader that Zinn believes that socialism and Communism are systems that advance the cause of humanity, and that America is a reactionary, terrorist state; those beliefs form the foundation of his tendentious and error-ridden book.

An Indigenous People 's’ History of the United States. A history book claimed to go above and beyond what has been stated in text before it. Every page is packed with details and references to other accredited historians, or examples of the mindset that has been historically infused. At first glance you think you already know about the history of the Native Americans. How we saw it fit to take their land, put them on ever shrinking “gifted” lands that would never allow them to strive again. How they are simply a conquered people who fought back and lost. Alas this book takes what you thought you knew and makes it more real, focusing on the unnecessary genocide. Admittedly this book was very difficult for me to read, I found myself trailing off, being confused with the connections. There were however quite a few spots that stuck out to me, especially those we have covered in our race lectures.