Actually Howard Zinn has absolutely no text book credits. The book everyone talks about "People's History" was written as a rebuttal to US History textbooks. A look between the two would show you one looks from the top down (Presidents, generals , great inventors, and businessmen) while Zinn looks at the common citizen, private, assembly line worker, etc. Last time I checked most people fit into the latter category, making it much more relevant to the average American.
It wasn't slave-owners who decided to free the slaves on their own. It wasn't the owners of the Lowell Clothing Mills that outlawed child labor in its contemporary form. Wilson didn't give women the right to vote freely. It took people, average people, willing to stand up against those in power that have given us the country we live in. You can have an opinion on history but those are the facts of the way in which America has progressed over time. Zinn, and numerous historians not just Zinn, have stated time and time again that history textbooks in the US are full of mis-truths because they are mainly written by non-historians. Most history text books have been written years ago with many years of revisions done by the editors to update them, not the historians themselves leaving out new histories which have been researched.
Zinn not only looks at the small guy, but he also makes us look at some of America's best loved people in new lights. Most people when you hear Mark Twain think of Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer, but not many know of him as a political dissident willing to speak out. These are things which put his stories into a greater context of the American story.
To end, when did dissent become Anti-American? I hear this all the time from conservative friends who label people as unamerican when they speak out against the given system. Every person Zinn talks about fought for radical change in the US not because they hated the country, but because they knew America could be better. Everyone knows today that the way in which things are in Washington, regardless of party (Republican AND Democrat), that it just doesn't work. So you see people organizing in either the Tea Party or with groups like SDS and various socialist organizations. And there is nothing wrong with that, because its the angry few that have changed America for the better. And in the end they become American heroes in every textbook, but with only have truths being told. And that ends up being a much worse indoctrination that any full truth that has ever been taught.
reply
share
armouredway
13 years ago
"Hence the deranged quality of this fairy tale, in which the incidents are made to fit the legend, no matter how intractable the evidence of American history. It may be unfair to expose to critical scrutiny a work patched together from secondary sources, many used uncritically (Jennings, Williams), others ravaged for material torn out of context (Young, Pike). Any careful reader will perceive that Zinn is a stranger to evidence bearing upon the people about whom he purports to write. But only critics who know the sources will recognize the complex array of devices that pervert his pages... On the other hand, the book conveniently omits whatever does not fit its overriding thesis... It would be a mistake, however, to regard Zinn as merely Anti-American. Brendan Behan once observed that whoever hated America hated mankind, and hatred of mankind is the dominant tone of Zinn's book... He lavishes indiscriminate condemnation upon all the works of man-- that is, upon civilization, a word he usually encloses in quotation marks."- Harvard University historian Oscar Handlin
Thank you Mr. Handlin. I couldn't have put it better.
reply
share
stpx
13 years ago
I was enthralled and my previous disposition had been dislodged until I read this: "It would be a mistake, however, to regard Zinn as merely Anti-American. Brendan Behan once observed that >>>>>>>whoever hated America hated mankind, and hatred of mankind is the dominant tone of Zinn's book<<<<<<<"
And I lost all esteem for the prestigious institution of "Harvard".
I do not hate America; I hate those Americans, those few Americans, who justify the hatred of others in the shadow of American patriotism. I hate those Americans who have come to convince the general mass of the national population that the interests held by the few are reflective of the interests of the many.
You must stop fooling yourself, if not for humanity's sake but for your own. If you believe that the elite share even a single interest with the mass of the people, you are delusional and I pity you.
reply
share
NoGuff
12 years ago
"I hate those Americans, those few Americans, who justify the hatred of others in the shadow of American patriotism. I hate those Americans who have come to convince the general mass of the national population that the interests held by the few are reflective of the interests of the many."
--Do you have any solid examples for any of those? Of significance, of course.
"If you believe that the elite share even a single interest with the mass of the people, you are delusional and I pity you."
--Yeah, "elites" (anyone who excels in any field of real life) don't love their children, don't care about life, don't want their family members to be safe and secure, don't care about food & water safety, don't care about the functioning of society, etc., etc., etc. You've got a great point there. I'm just not sure how you can back it up. Oh, wait, you're using a technique of class warfare, nevermind. Keep tossing those little bombs and running away, hoping they explode.
"Careful, man, there's a beverage here!" - The Dude
reply
share