"Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past" -some British propagandist

Preamble:
--Zinn filled in for that History 12 class taught by that one critical high school teacher which sadly I did not attend because I was duped into 3 blocks of marketing/entrepreneurship. True story. This history teacher had a running argument with the marketing teacher regarding the need to teach (in the marketing classes) how goods were sourced and their labor practices. That did not happen.
--Later, I stumbled across Zinn in the library, shortly after being introduced to Chomsky (and self-directed learning). Not an uncommon introduction to American radicalism. And here I am revisiting a decade later…

The Brilliant:
--It turns out my self-directed teachers were pretty bad-ass. “History” ranges from the mind-numbing litany of dates and names, to the dynamic ebbs and flows of struggle and possibilities.
--Furthermore, history is a manifestation of our social imagination; it acts as our footing and serves as a guiding light for how we build our present and future. Thus, it is a source of power for social control mostly written and disseminated by victors; if we cannot imagine change, how can we act on it?
--Zinn’s “People’s History” disrupts the social control narratives of history by starting from the bottom up, applying class analysis and emphasizing the political nature of recounting history (i.e. which “facts” are important and how should they be framed).
--Several points on the book’s conclusion:
1) I was reminded how Zinn missed the Occupy Movement by under 2 years. Had he lived, he could have seen the 99% slogan that he finished this book with spread in the cities he lectured in and beyond.
2) Powerful characterization of the middle class/academics as guards, and working/poor as prisoners, stuck in a system that rules by divide-and-conquer.
3) “Absentee authority”. What a great phrase.

The Good:
--“History” of this type is tricky. Historical details are useful for small case studies. For grand narratives, I tend to prefer political economy that really dives into the different layers and interactions between sociopolitical power and socioeconomic structures. But this method cannot possibly cover all the pieces of history that Zinn sets out to do here, so Zinn remains more on the surface resulting in an accessible (critical) History 101 book. Examples of in-dept political economy syntheses:
-The Darker Nations: A People's History of the Third World (yes, "A People's History", there's a connection with Zinn)
-And the Weak Suffer What They Must? Europe's Crisis and America's Economic Future

--I wanted to revisit Zinn’s perspectives on several topics in particular; only one did I get surprising findings:
1) Labor power during Great Depression/New Deal era:
-Going in, I was conflicted over this view of Yanis Varoufakis’: responding to the assertion that FDR was forced into the New Deal compromises by a well-organized labor movement, Varoufakis contends that labor’s bargaining power had vanished when the Great Depression hit, with the working class then lining up willing to do anything for employment.
-So, Zinn's Ch.15 “Self-Help in Hard Times” adds an interesting twist, and ended up reading like the heart of his book. Zinn portrays the significance of sitdown strikes during this time, driven by the rank-and-file against union leadership. Zinn further contends that the labor movement won most from rank-and-file spontaneous disruptions instead of through the organization of unions which was easier for State Capitalism to absorb into reformism. So much to unpack here… How much I would love to hear Varoufakis, Zinn, and global south communist Vijay Prashad discuss this together…

--These other topics were good intros, but need to look elsewhere for more depth:
2) Labor history during late-19th century: booms, busts, strikes… this is where political economy synthesis can really add shape to the events.
3) Capitalist crises' relationship with wars: good hints…
4) Race/“whiteness” as divide-and-conquer for settler colonialism/slave trade: hoping Gerald Horne can go more in-depth…

The Missing:
--I’m much faster recycling through old favorites than new reads, but I seriously need to get a move on all the global south perspectives I want to explore. Up next:
-favorite author Vijay Prashad’s sequel: The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of the Global South
-A Theory of Imperialism
-Perilous Passage: Mankind and the Global Ascendancy of Capital

A People’s History of the United States by Howard Zinn is a 2005 Harper Perennial Modern Classics publication.

I admit, up front, that this my first go at this book. I vaguely remember some controversy surrounding a history book that exposed the darker side of American History, and whether or not it belonged next to traditional history text in schools. However, this book came along after I graduated from high school, having been published in 1980, to the best of my knowledge, and my own children used traditional history textbooks in school.

It wasn’t until I heard the state of Arkansas was trying to have this book banned from its schools, that it piqued my interest. So, I checked it out of the library just to see what was so controversial about it.

It’s been a very long time since I picked up a history textbook of any kind. So, if nothing else, this book gave me a little refresher course on historical events. But, of course, I do see why some people would find learning about the underbelly of American history disconcerting.

The history covered begins in 1492 and was updated up to 2000’s war on Terrorism.

I’d never heard about most of these ‘untold’ portions of history, but as long as they are true, I don’t see the problem with informing students of the darker aspects of their history. The important thing to note, however, is the motive behinds some of these events and one's own perception of them.

If I began looking through this book with any kind of preset ideas, it would be in favor of telling the whole truth, not just the truth that paints our ancestors in the most flattering light possible. Still, I did pick up on a ‘tone’ here and there I wasn’t so sure should exist in a book designed as a teaching tool.
Of course, one could argue, those same ‘tones’ show up in more traditional history textbooks, too, and keep in mind that my ability to access 'tones' can be wonky sometimes, apparently.

Because I checked this book out of the library, and needed to get it turned back in, I didn’t read the book like I would a novel or any other kind of book. I skipped around here and there, skimmed some areas, and spent a great deal of time on topics that interested me the most.

The point, the author seemed intent on stressing, was that the rich took power and gained much off the backs of the poor or ‘downtrodden’. I think you would have to be truly dense not to pick up on that, but again, if it’s true, then by all means, at least allow the book in the classroom as a companion to the more traditional studies.

One thing I believe is clearly under attack in our present climate, is critical thinking. To disallow this book in the classroom because it shows another side of the story, is unhealthy. Students must learn to look at the information and make informed decisions about the data presented to them. Not only that, I just don’t like the idea of banning books. If the schools feel that strongly about using the book in the classroom, then at least give them the chance to check it out of the school library.

This is not your typical ‘dry’ history text, and I do understand why some people either loved it or hated it. For me, I hate to be wishy washy, but I fall somewhere in the middle. I didn’t hate it, and while it was interesting, I didn’t feel overly impressed either.

3 stars

You may not enjoy this book or agree with it and it definitely should not be the only history book you read, but it is crucial that you read this book at some point in your life. It's a slog, but so so rewarding and worthwhile to see history from this angle.

What can I say about this book that hasn't been said before? It's been on my to-read list literally since the eleventh grade. So I guess the most shocking thing I can say is that it took me this long to read it.

I knew a lot of the history described, either through other books (1491, Lies My Teacher Told Me, 1776) or because I worked for many years as an editor of New World history and anthropology. Maybe this is surprising, but what I was most shaky on was the late 20th century history. Or at least, I was shaky on the context. I can tell you about the race and class conflicts that underlie King Philip's War and Bacon's Rebellion, making those events crucial to the shaping of American culture... but I knew less about the Iran Contra affair. I can tell you about WWII, but not as much about Vietnam. I can tell you about the nineteenth century labor movement, but less about the Black Panthers. There was a big gap in my understanding, and it was the stuff my parents lived through.

What I can say with some certainty (more on that in a bit) is that all of American history---and probably world history---boils down to one thing: class war. The wealthy and powerful have been seeking ways to exploit the poor and powerless for profit for at least five centuries on this continent. Dig deep enough through the underlying causes of any conflict and it seems it all comes back to the bourgeoisie manipulating other people for the sake of capital. And they're shockingly good at it. And nothing has changed.

Except that things have changed. Slowly, incrementally, things have changed slightly for the better. But it has come at great cost and with great effort on the part of the non-bourgeoisie. Labor laws, civil rights, humane treatment of the powerless---all of this has come from scrabbling tooth and nail for years to wrest it from the hands of a wealthy and powerful class that has no other reason to give it up.

ALL OF WHICH SOUNDS LIKE THE STONED RAMBLINGS OF A PUBESCENT ANARCHIST. I'm painfully aware of that. And frankly, Zinn didn't do a good enough job of avoiding that characterization in his writing. He's right, but he sounds partisan. He's speaking the truth, but there are those who will dismiss the message because it sounds like crazed, paranoid propaganda. This book should come with a primer to sociology as a companion volume, even if just to lay down the meaning of some terms to dispel our over-politicization of said terms. As it is, it's completely easy to see why that shitty A Patriot' History... got written.

I loved that Zinn focused so much on economic history, and how those factors influenced social change. Viewing multiracial interactions and gender dynamics through the lens of economics is not only fascinating, but it provides useful insight on how to fix social ills.

I learned a lot. It depressed the hell out of me. And I wish the author had been able to temper his tone to reach a broader audience (he could learn from the weary finality of Michelle Alexander). But I learned a lot and will be using this book as a jumping off point to seek out more history that'll make me sad and angry.

Yay?

Do you think the U.S. government's domination by business interests and the wealthy is a relatively recent development? Think the founding fathers would be appalled by the current situation? Think Republicans are responsible for tax cuts for the rich? Think Democrats are the party of the working class? Think JFK was a pretty good guy? Think U.S. involvementin WWII was morally motivated?
If you want to find out why you're wrong about all these things, if you want clear evidence that our government was created precisely to protect the interests of the wealthy elite against the working people, and is currently functioning exactly according to plan, if you know that the two-party system is a con game but aren't exactly sure how it works, if you want to understand what 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are really about, then you need to read this book.

"It’s difficult in times like these: ideals, dreams and cherished hopes rise within us, only to be crushed by grim reality. It’s a wonder I haven’t abandoned all my ideals, they seem so absurd and impractical. Yet I cling to them because I still believe, in spite of everything, that people are truly good at heart." Thus famously said Anne Frank. I have lived my life clinging similarly to this idea. Howard Zinn's magnificent book makes it difficult. I choose not to shy away from hard or inconvenient truths. But Zinn reveals so many of them, there is such an onslaught of greed and racism and cruelty and deliberate inhumanity on display throughout American history in this unprettied-up, clear-eyed focus on the facts behind American "glory" that I often had a hard time returning to the book. The divisions, the hatred, the false patriotism, the undisguised greed, the twisting of facts that seem to define our current era are no new propositions. They've been with us since before the founding of the nation. But history, usually, is written by the winners, and winners rarely want the world to know what they were capable of in order to win. Zinn set out to write a history of America not from the perspective of the powerful, but from that of the defeated, the poor, the downtrodden, those discriminated against, and, often, the losers in centuries of conflict and ostensible progress. I think Zinn loves America as I do. But I think he, as I, have no interest in a fairy-tale version of our history where goodness and decency has always triumphed. Saint Paul said, "You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." Freedom does not come from being suckered by pretty lies and distortions. Mankind is a magnificent entity, but it is also a cruel, vindictive, and greedy entity, as well, and history is shaped far more drastically by these qualities than by man's better angels. Zinn rips the blinders off. It's not pretty, but it is an absolutely necessary viewpoint if we are to know who we are and what we stand for. This book is a masterpiece of history, of journalism, and of writing.

What? You want the truth? What's wrong with you?

The People's History of the United States was first published in 1980 and was a finalist for the National Book Award. It has gone through a few expansion editions until Zinn's death in 2010. It was intended as a counter balance to the typical glossy American history told from the perspective of our heroes and accomplishments. It is the sins of omission that Zinn addresses in giving voice to the common man. Instead of our traditional narrative, he explores the colonial conquest and expansion from the view of the Hispaniolas and Native Americans, the legal manipulations of those in poverty, rampant racism and the battle for civil rights, the intense and prolonged struggle for rights of the laboring class, the suffragette movement, imperialist meddling in other countries' politics for economic reasons, antiwar movements, and other resistance squelched by the government or kept quiet in the media. The impetus behind so much of our legislation as well as domestic and foreign policy from our earliest history to the present has really been what supports government controls, the agenda of the wealthy and economic interests at the expense of 99% of the population, and not just our own citizenry but globally. Zinn stated that he would like to be remembered "for introducing a different way of thinking about the world, about war, about human rights, about equality," Zinn makes no apologies for his liberal, rebellious leanings and he is no less patriotic for it. I am close enough in age that I am not surprised by his view points and attribute much to being of that generation. It took me a while to work through this book, not because it was difficult but because of my habit of further research. I found this read both distressing and prophetic to our current political situation. Highly recommended.

I write historical fiction for a living, which means I wake up, eat breakfast, and then go down the rabbit hole of historical research every day. Along the way I'm constantly bumping into the bits of history that get glossed over, rewritten, or forgotten altogether.

This books is an omnibus of those moments, a fascinating and distressing look at the cause and effect of hundreds of years of American imperialism.

Top 5 books of the year. Holy shit.

As with most nonfiction reads, now I'm ravenous for more. And I'm sure the print book is loaded with references and Further Reading and all that good stuff. I deeply appreciated Zinn's Afterword where he recognized his shortcomings with regard to minority people, specifically Latino/Latina issues and the LGBTQ community; I'd been disappointed earlier in the book with how Stonewall got something of a passing mention but there was barely anything said about Reagan's blind eye toward the devastation of the AIDS crisis.

My quibbles aside, this was excellent and I will highly recommend it to any who ask. There's so much in here I didn't know; wasn't taught; had never even heard of, let alone considered. Even reading about things that happened in my lifetime under the Bush/Clinton/Bush administrations, things I thought I knew (or at least vaguely remembered hearing about) were presented in such a way as to seem new, juxtaposed against the history already presented + my present awareness.

The anger is real.

Read it as part of the "American Literature and Culture" course of the PhD program. Back then (about three years ago) I was so naive that I actually read the material assigned by professors and the syllabi. As I grew older and wiser, I realized I have too insubordinate a temperament to fit in the academia.
However, I don't regret having read this book, since it served as an accessible and brief introduction for me to the history of America.
Before this, my only familiarity with American history was a picture book called Pocahontas about this knock-out native-American lady who falls head over heels for this blonde European lady killer. I read that book when I was a little kid, and to be honest, I fell in love with the lady myself.
Later on, since the environment in which I grew up was seething with anti-American heroism and nationalism, we were given this book to read. We were supposed to develop some sort of aversion toward the Land of the Free, which did not happen. However, I learned enough about the history of America to be able to react to commercial cinema (and culture) depicting Native Americans as savages and Europeans as saviors with "what a load of [euphemistically speaking] malarkey!"

تاریخ همه کشور ها معمولا از نظر وقایع کلی مبارزات حق طلبانه ، ظلم ها ، شادی ها یکسان است .فقط رنگ وشکل ان با هم فرق دارد و کمی هم از نظر تاخر و تقدم زمان وقوع حوادث و رویدادها متفاوت است .
هر قهرمانی برای عده ای قهرمان است و برای عده ای دیگر ضد قهرمان ،نگاه تاریخی به واقعه ای در یک ظرف زمان تراژدی است و وقتی در برهه زمان دیگری وبا توجه به دست آورده های ان بررسی میگردد یک لازم مبارک .
بشر نمیدانم در طول تاریخ متوحش یا متمدن شده است ولی هر چه هست خالق بشر امید دارد به این بشر و من امید دارم به این امید