This was an interesting book to read. Howard Zinn chronicles US history from 1492 to present. What makes it interesting is Zinn's decision to write about history largely from the perspective of regular folks. I learned about different uprisings, protests, resistance to government and civil rights movement. The book is dominated by examples of social and economic inequality in the US. It exposes the dark side of the American history, stuff they don't (or didn't) teach you in school. Overall, I enjoyed reading this hefty tome and I would recommend it to anyone who wants to improve on their previous knowledge of American history.

Audiobook narrated by Matt Damon. Nuff said.

A People's History of the United States, Howard Zinn

Howard Zinn (August 24, 1922, New York, - January 27, 2010, Santa Monica) was an American historian, playwright, philosopher, socialist thinker and World War II veteran.

Historian Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States chronicles American history from the bottom up, throwing out the official narrative taught in schools —with its emphasis on great men in high places— to focus on the street, the home, and the workplace. Known for its lively, clear prose as well as its scholarly research, it is the only volume to tell America's story from the point of view of —and in the words of— America's women, factory workers, African-Americans, Native Americans, the working poor, and immigrant laborers. As Zinn shows, many of our country's greatest battles —the fights for a fair wage, an eight-hour workday, child-labor laws, health and safety standards, universal suffrage, women's rights, racial equality— were carried out at the grassroots level, against bloody resistance. Covering Christopher Columbus's arrival through President Clinton's first term, A People's History of the United States features insightful analysis of the most important events in our history. This edition also includes an introduction by Anthony Arnove, who wrote, directed, and produced The People Speak with Zinn and who coauthored, with Zinn, Voices of a People’s History of the United States.

تاریخ نخستین خوانش روز بیست و چهارم ماه مارس سال2016میلادی

عنوان: ‏‫تاریخ آمریکا از سال1492میلادی تا سال2001میلادی؛ نویسنده: هاوارد (هوارد) زین؛ مترجم: مانی صالحی‌علامه؛ تهران، نشر آمه، سال1390، در928ص؛ شابک9789642071708؛ چاپ دوم سال1391؛ چاپ سوم سال1393؛ چاپ چهارم تهران، نشر اختران، سال1397؛ موضوع تاریخ آمریکا از نویسندگان ایالات متحده آمریکا - سده 20م

این کتاب را استاد تاریخ نگار و دانشمند روانشاد «هوارد زین (سال1922میلادی - سال2010میلادی)» بر خلاف دیدگاهها و روشهای پیشین برای بازگویی تاریخ «آمریکا» که تأکید بر تشریح رویدادها از دیدگاه اشخاص توانمند و مطرح زمان داشتند، نگاشته اند؛ «هوارد» رویدادهای تاریخی را از دیدگاه مردمان عادی، و افرادی که برای بدست آوردن آزادی، حقوق مدنی، و بهبود شرایط اقتصادی خود، تلاش میکردند، همانند مهاجران نادار اروپایی، برده های آفریقایی، کارگران، و زنان بازگشایی میکنند؛ این کتاب سهم بسزایی در بازنگری و برداشت آمریکاییها از تاریخ کشورشان دارد، و تصویر بسیار دیگرگونه ای از قهرمانان سنتی تاریخ «آمریکا» همانند «کریستف کلمب»، «اندرو جکسون» و «تئودور روزولت» به نمایش میگذارد

کشتیهای بزرگ در ساحل پهلو گرفتند، و «کریستف کلمب» ظفرمند پا به خشکی گذاشت، تا سرزمینی نو را کشف کند؛ این روایتی رسمی از کشف «قاره آمریکا» بوده است؛ اما به راستی ساکنان بومی سواحل که به آن کشتیها نگاه میکردند، چه اندیشه ای و چه پایانی داشتند؛ روانشاد «هاوارد زین» در کتاب «تاریخ آمریکا» به روایت تاریخ، از زبان آن کسانی پرداخته اند، که تا اکنون سخنگویی نداشته اند، و البته ایشان به جای داوری اخلاقی، و سوگواری برای بگذشته ها، تلاش دارند تا تاریخ، از چشم دیگری هم دیده شود، و راه برای اندیشه ی بهتر گشوده گردد؛ برای همین «زین» به جای دمیدن در شیپور تاریخ دولتی، داستان کشف «قاره آمریکا» را از دیدگاه بومیان، و «آراواکها»، و ماجرای «قانون اساسی ایالات متحده» را، از دیدگاه بردگان سیاهپوست، و سرگذشت «اندرو جکسون» را، از دید «سرخپوستان چِروکی»، و ماجرای جنگ داخلی را، از دید «ایرلندیهای نیویورک»، و «جنگ مکزیک» را از دید سربازان فراری لشکر «ژنرال اسکات»، و پیدایش و توسعه صنایع، و صنعتمداری را از نگاه زنان جوان کارگر در «کارخانجات نساجی لاوِل»، و جنگ «اسپانیا و آمریکا» را از دیدگاه «کوباییها»، و اشغال «فیلیپین» را از دید سربازان «سیاهپوست لوزون»، و «دوران زراندود» را از نگاه «کشاورزان ایالات جنوبی»، و «جنگ جهانی نخست» را از دیدگاه سوسیالیستها، و «جنگ جهانی دوم» را از دیدگاه «صلح طلبان»، و «طرح نیودیل» یا «اصلاحات روزولت» را از چشم «سیاهپوستان محله ی هارلم»، و انحصارطلبی و سلطه ی آمریکای پس از جنگ جهانی را از دیدگاه «کارگران مزارع» در «آمریکای لاتین» مینگارند.

ایشان با تکیه بر سندها و به ویژه نوشتارهای بر جای مانده، و پژوهشهای پژوهشگران، نشان میدهند زمانی که «کلمب» وارد شد، شمار جمعیت مردمی که بر عرصه ی پهناور زمینهای «قاره آمریکا» پراکنده بودند، نزدیک به هفتاد و پنج میلیون بود، که شاید بیست و پنج میلیون تن از آنها ساکن «آمریکای شمالی» بودند؛ آنان در واکنش به شرایط گوناگون اقلیمی و خاک، صدها نوع فرهنگ قبیله ای گوناگون، و شاید دو هزار زبان گوناگون را پدید آورده بودند؛ آنان فن کشاورزی را به کمال رسانده، و دریافته بودند که چگونه باید ذرت را به عمل آورند، چون به صورت خودرو تکثیر نمیشد، و باید آن را کاشت و داشت و آبیاری میکردند، و پس از برداشت محصول، باید غلاف یا پوشش روی ذرت را میکندند، و دانه ها را جدا میکردند؛ آنها با نبوغی باور نکردنی انواع دیگری از میوه و سبزیجات از جمله «بادام زمینی»، «کاکائو»، «توتون» و «کائوچو» را پرورش میدادند

اساطیر و داستانهای برجای مانده، همگی از اندیشه ی والا، و دل پرمهر سرخپوستان حکایتها دارند، کما اینکه «کلمب» خود به روشنی به خوش قلبی آنها اشاره میکند، و البته آن را ساده لوحی میداند؛ براساس گزارش «کلمب»: (سرخپوستان بسیار ساده لوح هستند، و چنان به راحتی اموال و داراییهایشان را به دیگران میبخشند، که تا کسی به چشم خود نبیند، نمیتواند باور کند، آنگاه که شما تقاضای چیزی را میکنید که از آنِ آنهاست، هرگز نه نمیگویند؛ درست برعکس، آنها حاضر هستند همه چیزشان را با دیگران شریک باشند...)؛ «کلمب» در پایان گزارشش از اعلی حضرتین تقاضای یاری کوچکی کرده بود، و میگفت در برابر، در سفر دیگرش «هر قدر طلا که نیاز داشته باشند...؛ و هر تعداد برده که بخواهند» برایشان میآورد؛ به این ترتیب به خوبی پیداست که «کریستف کلمب» و اخلاف و جانشینانش، به بیابانی برهوت و خالی از سکنه نیامده بودند، بلکه به دنیایی وارد شده بودند که در بعضی محلها - درست همانند خود اروپا - جمعیت بسیاری زندگی میکردند، که فرهنگی پیشرفته و پیچیده داشتند، و روابط انسانی در میان آنها تکامل یافته تر از اروپاییان بود، و روابط میان مردان، زنان، کودکان و طبیعت، شاید زیباتر و دلپذیرتر از هر جای دیگری در دنیا، به دقت طراحی و تعیین شده بود؛ ساکنان بومی، مردمانی فاقد زبان نوشتاری بودند، اما قوانین ویژه ی خودشان، اشعار و تاریخشان را به یاد سپرده، و با واژگانی شفاهی، که شاید پیچیده تر و کاملتر از اروپاییها بود، همراه با آواز و رقص و نمایشهای آیینی، و سینه به سینه به نسلهای پس از خود جابجا میکردند؛ آنان توجه ویژه ای به رشد و پرورش شخصیت، پایداری اراده، خودمختاری فردی، توانایی همسانی، نرمش و حوصله، احساسات و عواطف، اقتدار و توانایی فردی و نیز همراهی و شراکت با یکدیگر و با طبیعت اطراف شان داشتند؛ اما رهآورد «کلمب» برای «اسپانیایی»ها چه بود؟ به روایت «زین» آن همه طلا و نقره ای که به تاراج رفت، و به «اسپانیا» برده شد، مردمان «اسپانیا» را غنیتر نکرد؛ تنها مدتی امکان برتری ناچیزی در موازنه ی قوا را به شاهان «اسپانیا» بخشید، و اینان فرصتی پیدا کردند، تا سربازان مزدور بیشتری، برای جنگهایشان اجیر کنند؛ آنان به هر حال جنگها را باختند و تنها چیزی که باقی ماند تورمی مرگبار، مردمانی گرسنه، ثروتمندتر شدن ثروتمندان، فقیرتر شدن فقیران و طبقه کشاورزی در هم شکسته بود

تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 04/01/1401هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی

Why write a history of the United States when you know it is one-sided and basically propaganda? I understand his stated reasons for writing the book but I think the truth is better than "this is propaganda to fight mainstream history that I think is propaganda." Any one-sided historical accounts are not worth people's time and knowingly writing one is a waste of time. The truth remains obscured.

An essential book for your home library for mind expansion and reference. I have added a lot of notes to this book to guide you from chapter to chapter in case you have particular areas of interest that you do not want to miss. I have owned a copy of this book a long time and have never read it from Cover to cover. I finally got a copy of the audible version and that helped me get through the entire book. If you are having that same problem I urge you to go immediately to chapters 25 and 26. I would like to quote those chapters to you word by word. They are outstanding.

Some people criticize this book as ahistorical. I think what that means is that people think that it does not show history as they are used to hearing it. Zinn talks about that fact at the end of the book. He says the obvious. Historians pick and choose about what facts they include in their writing. This does not necessarily mean that the facts they leave out are untrue or misleading. Zinn titles this book as a People's history. He points out that often history goes through time moving from significant person to significant person. It is not surprising when you realize that a lot of those significant people are white males.

Zinn is refreshing to me in that he takes an anti-capitalist point of view without beating you over the head with it. Well, maybe he does do a little beating over the head in the last couple of chapters but in most of the book he talks about people's movements and times when the masses of people tried to take over their own lives rather than being lead.

5 Stars - Superb book, one of my all time favorites.

I've been meaning to read this for years and I am so glad I finally did! I knew from the cover that I would probably like this book because my favorite historian, Eric Foner, is quoted and gives a glowing review. This is a nice, hefty book and since it is a comprehensive history of the U.S., from what are probably considered non-traditional viewpoints, one might assume it's dry. However it is not. Zinn is able to describe historical events, movements, concepts from the perspectives of people history classes often leave out. There is even some historiography though not too much where the book is dry. Really there is a nice balance of facts, analysis and historiography. I will say that personally a lot of what might be considered new facts for some were not new for me. I attribute that to absolutely fantastic history teachers and professors I've had throughout my academic career. They really tried to give the whole picture - not the stereotypical rich, white male viewpoint. That being said, of course there were facts (and in some cases, whole movements) I was unaware of and I'm now glad I know about them. I'm going to refrain from giving a detailed analysis of each chapter because there is just so much to share, so I'm going to share some of my favorite thoughts and quotes.

One of the thoughts I had reading this, and want to share, is something that was eloquently described in season one, episode one of The Newsroom. The main character is asked what makes America the greatest country in the world, and after a few bullshit answers he let's loose.

It's not the greatest country in the world, professor! That's my answer.

I'll spare you the whole response, but if interested here  it is. There is this spoken and non-spoken belief that America is the greatest country in the world, and this book proves it is not. Now, that doesn't mean great things haven't happened and there haven't been incredible moments and eras. However, American history is stained with genocide, slavery, racism, sexism, etc. The U.S. is no better than any other country but there are things that make it unique and special. It's not perfect, never will be but if we can own up to our mistakes and try to make amends we can get on the right path.

Quotes

n  

"To emphasize the heroism of [Christopher] Columbus and his successors as navigators and discoverers, and to deemphasize their genocide, is not a technical necessity but an ideological choice. It serves - unwittingly - to justify what was done." -p. 9

n

n  

"The leaders of the Independence movement wanted to use that mob energy against England, but also to contain it so that it would not demand too much from them.: -p. 65

n

n  

"When feminist impulses are recorded, they are, almost always, the writings of privileged women[.]" -p. 110

n

This should be recommended reading for American history classes. Although I disagree with some of his conclusions, Zinn researched information that most historians don't bother with. It is indispensable as a source on American history and no library on the the subject would be complete without it.

No matter your viewpoint, or opinion on this book, it's worth reading just for the wider perspective.

"There is no such thing as a pure fact, innocent of interpretation. Behind every fact presented to the world—by a teacher, a writer, anyone—is a judgment. The judgment that has been made is that this fact is important, and that other facts, omitted, are not important.
...
What we learn about the past does not give us absolute truth about the present, but it may cause us to look deeper than the glib statements made by political leaders and the 'experts' quoted in the press."

If nothing else—read the afterward, right here.

One of the most poorly written pieces of propaganda I've ever had the misfortune to read. I'll give it this: it filled in a few blindspots in my knowledge of history. There were several major events that I could swear I never learned about in history classes. (Perhaps because my high school history teacher was also the football coach and gave extra credit on exams for guessing the point spread of the upcoming game, but that's another story.) Other than that, reading this book was like pulling teeth -- from the laughably poor prose to the confusing and unnecessarily alinear chronological organization to the blatantly biased viewpoint (which, in fairness, the author acknowledges and justifies to some extent). The upside is that, now that I've read it, I won't be talked down to by all the raving liberals in my life who insist it's on par with the fucking Bible. But real, I mean.

Update: I took this out of the library to attempt a reread...no changes, wanted to be fair. Still don't care for it. As noted, no changes.


Oh my goodness aren't we brave to tell (re-tell) American history this way? "You've been lied to and only I have the strength of character to tell you about it"

Yeah, yeah, yeah I've heard it all before. In C.S. Lewis' Great Divorce there's a high churchman of the Church of England who's going on about how brave he was to take a secular stand and renouncing "traditional" beliefs. The "person" he's talking to (who was with him at that time) calls him on it and says you were never in danger of being renounced. You were in the main stream and only pretending (or possibly fooling yourself to put the best face on it) to go against the main stream. That's what we've got here, Since the 70s it's been "fashionable" to try and "debunk" American values and heroes. This one goes right down the line from going for the worst take possible on Columbus to attacking the motives of everyone involved in the American Revolution.

You want to read this, fine. But let me suggest some balance, bias is bias no matter which side it comes from or comes down on.

I won't debate (for example) Christopher Columbus' motives here...just realize he like everyone else was a product of his times and if you read his own writings you'll find "slavery and genocide" were the farthest things from his mind.

European "industrial" culture met a hunter gatherer culture and we got the predictable result. Does anyone really think that maybe fencing off the "New World" and making it a sort of preserve for tribal culture would ever have happened? Yes there were tragedies (I am not taking them lightly, all human history is rife with tragedy) but the continual self flagellation and the "let's all hate America and feel guilty about history-ism" has gotten silly. If we can't look at it for what it is and was and then move on we'll destroy ourselves.


*******

I'm adding these review segments from other sources simply to bolster the point that what I say/said here is far from some simply biased conservative opinion (though I am generally speaking conservative). I would suggest that those who read this review and have the reaction that is common for many on the left first read the 7 pages (update 7/10/2022, now there are 10 pages) of arguments (attacks) that are already here. Answering that same comments over and over is getting silly.

We as a people (America) are losing (giving up) the ability to think for ourselves. Many are far more likely to try and shout down any opposing thoughts rather than think about them. We are at a place where communication has almost ceased. If we don't get back to the "loyal opposition" and the ability to disagree logically and civilly we will soon reach a point of no return.

So please just think and consider what you believe.:

Judging by the History News Network’s online vote conducted in 2012, many American historians loathe Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. More than 600 historians who participated in this vote pronounced Zinn’s radical history the second “least credible history book in print.” Comments by participants in the HNN vote suggest that this negative verdict on A People’s History had an ideological dimension. Zinn’s “viewing American history through a Marxist lens is a painful exercise in tortured reasoning” complained one online critic, while another denounced A People’s History as “absolutely atrocious agit-prop.

******
Stanford Education Professor Sam Wineburg.:

"Wineburg, one of the world's top researchers in the field of history education, raises larger issues about how history should be taught. He says that Zinn's desire to cast a light on what he saw as historic injustice was a crusade built on secondary sources of questionable provenance, omission of exculpatory evidence, leading questions and shaky connections between evidence and conclusions.
Indeed, says Wineburg, while Zinn pulled his anecdotes from a secondary source, Lawrence Wittner's 1969 book Rebels Against War, Zinn ignored evidence in that same book that undermines his claim. Among the examples Zinn overlooks is Wittner's point that 24 percent of the registrants eligible for the war were African American, while the percentage of draft-evasion cases involving blacks was only 4.4 percent of the total pursued by the Justice Department. And a similar trend held with conscientious objectors. "Surprisingly few black men became C.O.s," Wittner adds.

Similarly, Zinn roots his argument that the Japanese were prepared to surrender before the United States dropped the atomic bomb on a diplomatic cable from the Japanese to the Russians, supposedly signaling a willingness to capitulate. Wineburg writes that Zinn not only excludes the responses to the cable, but also that he fails in the later editions of the book to incorporate the vast new scholarship that emerged after the death of the Emperor Hirohito with the publication of memoirs and new availability of public records, all of which support the position of Japan's resolve to fight to the last."

*******************
KIRKUS REVIEW
"For Howard Zinn, long-time civil rights and anti-war activist, history and ideology have a lot in common. Since he thinks that everything is in someone's interest, the historian--Zinn posits--has to figure out whose interests he or she is defining/defending/reconstructing (hence one of his previous books, The Politics of History). Zinn has no doubts about where he stands in this "people's history": "it is a history disrespectful of governments and respectful of people's movements of resistance." So what we get here, instead of the usual survey of wars, presidents, and institutions, is a survey of the usual rebellions, strikes, and protest movements. Zinn starts out by depicting the arrival of Columbus in North America from the standpoint of the Indians (which amounts to their standpoint as constructed from the observations of the Europeans); and, after easily establishing the cultural disharmony that ensued, he goes on to the importation of slaves into the colonies. Add the laborers and indentured servants that followed, plus women and later immigrants, and you have Zinn's amorphous constituency. To hear Zinn tell it, all anyone did in America at any time was to oppress or be oppressed; and so he obscures as much as his hated mainstream historical foes do--only in Zinn's case there is that absurd presumption that virtually everything that came to pass was the work of ruling-class planning: this amounts to one great indictment for conspiracy. Despite surface similarities, this is not a social history, since we get no sense of the fabric of life. Instead of negating the one-sided histories he detests, Zinn has merely reversed the image; the distortion remains."

***************

An indispensable history, told with dedication and compassion. The book truly lives up to its title: it is genuinely a people's history, told from the standpoint of the masses, pulling together the innumerable threads of struggle - indigenous, African, Latino, immigrant, unemployed, low-paid, women, gay - into a vision of a society that works for ordinary people, where the profiteers no longer pull the strings, where dignified work and social equality take the place of criminal war and severe inequality.

I disagree with Zinn on a few issues, particularly his somewhat grumpy and terse criticism of the various socialist experiments of the 20th century, which Zinn seems to dismiss as being no better than US free market fundamentalism. But I guess you have to expect a few differences of opinion in a 700-page history book. Overall "A People's History of the United States" really is an outstanding, must-read book.

Zinn's book is nothing more than a one-sided, hit piece against western civilization and America. Rather than balance the story of America from the perspective of the evils present in all human culture and civilzation, Zinn presents a picture of the United States and western Europeans as the "root of all evil". This book is the most twisted, biased, manipulative propaganda screed I've ever laid eyes on outside of a communist party manual. Everything about America, in this book, is bad. The "evil white man" is the super-villain. The black, brown and red people are the heroes who live in some fantasy land of "noble savages" and perfect harmony with nature, until the evil white European comes along to rape, kill and enslave. There are far better books on the history of the United States and this worthless, leftist propaganda screed is not even worth your time let alone your money.