Rhetorical Analysis A People's History Of The United States Zinn

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

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

1. Each author had their own objective in writing each of the books. Both books tell the tale of history much like any other textbook. However, each book leaves out certain events creating a noticeable bias between the two. In The People’s History of the United States, the liberal author Howard Zinn writes about American history in a particularly unconventional way to convince the reader that there is another side to the history of the United States, one that does not necessarily invoke a feeling of patriotism, but rather showcases several flaws. On the other hand, Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen write about American history in a very patriotic way in A Patriot’s History of the United States to persuade the reader that one should feel a sense of pride in the history of the United States. Although they bear many similarities due to history not changing, the differences between The People’s History of the United States and A Patriot’s History of the United States are very pronounced due to the bias of each author.

1. According to Zinn, what is his main purpose for writing A People's History of the United States?

a.) According to Zinn, the main purpose behind the writing of A People’s History of the United States was to tell the history of the United States through the losers POV.

Writing a book with an uncommonly taught perspective, Zinn tried to verify his take on U.S history. There are inserts from various documents, such as diaries, ledgers, and newspapers used as supporting documents to his claim,

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.

of America. In writing this book, the major aim, for Zinn, was to set a quiet revolution. This

2. Zinn's thesis for pages 1 to 11 is to tell the arrival of Columbus as it really happened from the point of view of the Indians. He doesn't try to hide the things that Columbus and other Europeans did to the Indians and talks about how the Indians were not inferior as the Europeans had thought they were.

This book has proven to be an enlightening read. It both teaches and inspires. Howard Zinn has offered us a perspective of the real story of American history heretofore unavailable to us – history from the perspective of real people – immigrant laborers, American women, the working poor, factory workers, African and Native Americans.

Regarding the article, “Columbus, the Indians, and Human Progress, Dr. Howard Zinn argues that there is another perspective to consider as to Christopher Columbus’ adventures. Dr. Howard Zinn’s position is that history books have omissions of slavery, death and innocent bloodshed that accompanied the adventures of Christopher Columbus. In the following statements Dr. Howard Zinn describes his perspective; “The writer began the history, five hundred years ago, of the European invasion of the Indian Settlement in the Americas. That beginning, when you read Las Casas- even if his figures are exaggerations (were there 3 million Indians to begin with, as he says or 250,000, as modern historians calculate) is conquest, slavery, and death. When

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

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

The ethnic cleansing of Pequot tribesmen by Captain John Mason during the 1630s and the military excursions into the Philippines, Cuba, and Hispaniola in the late 1800s/early 1900s are examples Zinn’s description of these associated dangers (McKenna & Feingold 2011, 13-15). In The Power and the Glory, Zinn further expounds on Albert Einstein’s argument that, “Wars will stop when men refuse to fight” by stating American will stop fighting wars when they discard the myth of American exceptionalism (McKenna & Feingold 2011, 18).

From the “underdog” perspective, the Howard Zinn perspective, was a cruel, unforgiving time. According to Zinn,