A People's History of the United States

History is subjective. It is written and recorded by both regular people and historians, all of whom have their own personal biases, interpretations of events, and beliefs, regardless of how conscious they are of trying to be objective. No account of history escapes this phenomenon.This brings an important question to light: Whose account of history have we been taught? For many of us, especially those of us taught in public schools, it is the version approved by people in positions of power. In A People’s History of the United States, our author Howard Zinn does the opposite, telling history from the point of view of the powerless.It starts with Columbus meeting the Native Americans in the late 1400’s. Many textbooks teach that he discovered new lands and new people and became economic partners with them. Through a European lens, this is true. If we consider this initial meeting through the eyes of the native people, however, we might interpret events differently. Columbus could not have discover America, the continent was already inhabited by millions of indigenous people. Did they trade peacefully? Perhaps at times, but Columbus’ men also enslaved many of the natives and treated them with extreme hostility. This same trend played out repeatedly as more Europeans sailed west and encountered the Native Americans. The Spanish and Portuguese subjugated the people of South and Central America, whilst the English subjugated those in the North.Perhaps we know a bit of this history, and recognize that European-Native American relations were more antagonistic than harmonious. This, again, is only a partial truth, as “more than half the colonists who came to the North American shores in the colonial period came as servants.” Subjugation was not only reserved for the Native Americans, even many white men and women were oppressed by their own European elites. It was a society in favor of the few at the expense of the many. This, more than anything, is the theme of this book.Zinn proposes that the history of The United States is a history of dominance by the elite classes over Native Americans, Blacks, Latinos, Asians, women, those living in poverty, and pretty much anyone without the ability to resist. Not only was this dominance financial, with the elite class keeping the wealth created by the labor class for themselves, but it was often physical and emotional as well. When movements of poor and working class people coalesced and petitioned for more rights and better working conditions, they were often met with imprisonment, violence, and death. The following are statistics from this book that illuminate these trends:In 1770, in Boston, the top 1 percent of property owners owned 44 percent of the wealth.In 1820, 120,000 Indians lived east of the Mississippi. By 1844, fewer than 30,000 were left.Between 1790 and 1860, the number of slaves grew from 500,000 to 4,000,000.In 1877, 100,000 workers went on strike against the railroad companies.In 1886 there were over 1,400 strikes, involving 500,000 workers.In 1914, the income of 44 families making $1 million or more equaled the total income of 100,000 families earning $500 a year.During World War Two, there were 14,000 strikes involving 6,770,000 workers.In 1950, the military had a budget of about $12 billion out of a total US budget of about $40 billion. In 1960, the military budget was $45.8 billion—49.7 percent of the total budget.In 1961, about 200 giant corporations out of 200,000 corporations—one-tenth of 1 percent of all corporations—controlled about 60 percent of the manufacturing wealth of the nation.In 1977, the top 10 percent of the American population had an income thirty times that of the bottom tenth; the top 1 percent of the nation owned 33 percent of the wealth.On June 12, 1982, 1,000,000 people gathered in Central Park, New York City, to express their determination to bring an end to the arms race.In 1990, the average pay of the chief executive officers of the 500 largest corporations was 64 times that of the average worker. By 1999, it was 475 times the average worker’s pay.In 1998, one of every three working people in the United States had jobs paying at or below the federal poverty level (from the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Census Bureau).Zinn asserts that the history of The United States is a history of control by the elite class. Consider the founding fathers: They were nearly all lawyers by profession and were “men of wealth, in land, slaves, manufacturing, or shipping.” Forty of the fifty-five men held government bonds, according to the records of the Treasury Department. These men were obviously from the elite class, which begs the question: If they were truly determined to compose a Constitution that ensured equally for all, why were no slaves, women, servants, or men without property allowed to be a part of the writing process?Consider a recent presidential election: In 1980, Ronald Reagan received 51.6 percent of the popular vote while Jimmy Carter received 41.7 percent. These numbers look good until you factor in the reality that “only 54 percent of the voting-age population voted, so that—of the total eligible to vote—27 percent voted for Reagan.” A democracy is supposed to be a system of government in which the people govern themselves by electing representatives from amongst their ranks. However, if half of eligible voters don’t bother to participate and don’t believe in the system, is it really a democracy? The country was thus presided over by a man who was selected by just over one-quarter of the citizenry. In his first term in office, Reagan cut $140 billion dollars in social programs while simultaneously increasing the ‘defense’ budget by $181 billion. He clearly cared more about allocating money for the military industrial complex than for the poor.A People’s History of the United States is a long and methodical book—it covers events from colonial times up to the 2000 presidential election and the “war on terror.” It is a necessary alternative to the versions of history proposed to many of us in school and should be taught in conjunction with them. The question that came to my mind when I finished reading it was this: Is the story of The United States a story about liberal democracy or a story about elite power?

The teaching of American history in elementary and middle schools reminds one of the cleaning of a commode: any rings or crud are removed and the bowl is disinfected. It then looks shiny and pretty, as if no foul stuffs were ever deposited in it. The tall tales and antiseptic methodologies employed in the teaching of American history in these citadels of bias are finally being countered by some historians, who are also clearly biased but self-consciously so. They do not hesitate to study the foul stuffs that have been part of the history of the United States, and are willing to put up with the strong odors thereof. What results in their writings is a compilation of the facts that are left unreported by the sycophants of established educational hierarchies. The picture they paint is not a pretty one, but for those who desire the bare, naked truth, and not the stale platitudes of whitewashed historical analysis, it can be a grand viewing.The author of this book is one of these new historians, and he does not hesitate to dig deep into the real stories that have remained hidden for decades. Historical analysis of course is more then muckracking, and requires an accounting of what has occurred in the past without blinders. It also must put to rest the notion that historical events are controlled by a ruling elite, and the latter are not the distinguishing features of history. History is not a history of kings, queens, and princesses. They play a role but it is an ancillary one. The title of this book refreshingly reminds us of this. History is governed and directed by the actions of many individuals, known and unknown. The author calls them "the people", and their story is told unabashedly in this book. The author is clearly a socialist, but his attitude is one of a healthy skepticism towards government, and justified distrust of the military establishment. He reminds us that the draft was in place as early as the Revolutionary War, as were the exceptions granted for avoidance of it. For example in Connecticut Yale students and faculty were exempted from the draft, as were ministers and various government officials. There was also the familiar schism between officers and "ordinary" soldiers, and any in the latter class who chose not to respect this distinction were whipped severely. Wealthy individuals dominated the Continental Congress, but most "ordinary" soldiers were not getting paid. Some groups of "ordinary" soldiers rebelled and some executed by firing squad when the rebellion was suppressed (in one case by soldiers of George Washington himself who led the suppression). The author's commentary and documentation on the Revolutionary War certainly act as a counterexample against the belief that this war had universal support and thought of as a noble cause by the general populace of the time. The Revolutionary War, like all other wars, was an ugly, messy affair, and had its share of false patriotism, brutality, and cowardice, and it affected many other peoples that had no interest or stake in it: native American tribes such as the Iroquois and the Mohawk. These tribes did not come under the umbrella of the Declaration of Independence. Some of these tribes therefore launched, with complete justification, a guerilla war against the new American citizenry, especially when the latter decided to push westward and indulge itself in the forced acquisition of land.The author tells us of the smallpox biological warfare launched against the Appalachian tribes by the British, causing a major epidemic. He tell us of the thousands of black slaves who fought with the British in the Revolutionary War, as did the majority of the Indian tribes. He tell us of the keeping of slaves by Thomas Jefferson throughout his life, of the fact that most of the authors of the Constitution were men of wealth, and none were slaves, indentured servants, women, or men without property. He tell us of Shay's rebellion and its counter, the Riot Act, which allowed authorities to keep people in jail without trial, and of the defiance of Anne Hutchinson against the church fathers in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. He tells us of New Jersey's rescinding of women's right to vote in 1807, of a "feminist" movement as early as the 1840's, and of the founding in 1821 of the Troy Female Seminary by Emma Willard.The author reminds us that the war of 1812 was a conflict waged for expansion into Florida, Canada, and Indian territories, that Congress deliberately and without hesitation appropriated money for war against the Seminoles, and that President Van Buren openly bragged to Congress about the forced removal of Cherokees from lands east of the Mississippi. He reminds us of the doctrine of "manifest destiny" and its justification of the brutal war against Mexico waged by President James Polk in the 1840's with the jingoistic assistance of the newspapers (no other course would be rational some of them reported), with Mexico losing half its territory in the 1848 treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. He reminds us of the Anti-Renter movement in the Hudson valley of New York, and that the Renssalaer family at one time ruled over eighty thousand tenants. He reminds us of Dorr's Rebellion in Rhode Island that attacked the idea, and its perpetrators, that only landowners could vote.So yes, there is much in this book that is fascinating and that is food for a hungry and inquisitive mind. It certainly goes against the mainstream view, and any teacher of history will probably come under fire from those who employ them if they decide to discuss the facts and analysis in this book. The history of the United States has been one of brutality mixed with brilliance, the former of which is emphasized in the pages of this book. A future treatise might emphasize the latter, and together they can give a more accurate picture of what the United States is, what it has been, and its future potential.

Good

Un excelente libro para comprender la verdadera historia de los Estados Unidos, y no sólo eso, la verdadera historia del mundo moderno. La manera en que los Estados Unidos han influido en los acontecimientos que han impactado en el desarrollo de la civilización desde el siglo XIX. Es una novela reveladora y a veces puede parecer muy dura. Pero toca temas que no es fácil encontrar en otro lado. Muy recomendable para leer.

Mr Howard Zinn has done extensive research in writing this book. Great read for anyone wanting to know about the struggles of people before gaining independence.

Great, interesting book. Can only recommend.

On a une autre vision des états unis d'Amerique à travers les presses locales et surtout les lois confédérales et leur déclinaison dans chaque état .