A People's History of the United States author Howard Zinn seeks to present U.S. history through the eyes of ordinary people. He depicts the struggles of Native Americans against European and U.S. conquest and expansion, of slaves against slavery, of unionists and other workers against capitalism, of women against patriarchy, of African-Americans against racism and for civil rights -- stories, as Zinn suggests, not often told in mainstream histories. A People's History, though a dissident work, has become a major success, and was a runner-up in 1980 for the National Book Award. A People's History has been adopted as required reading in high schools and colleges throughout the United States and has been frequently updated since its publication in 1980 (the most recent edition covers events through 2003^*).

The New York Times review of the book suggested that is should be "required reading" for students ^*.

In a 1998 interview prior to a speaking engagement at the University of Georgia, Zinn told Catherine Parayre he had set "quiet revolution" as his goal for writing A People's History. "Not a revolution in the classical sense of a seizure of power, but rather from people beginning to take power from within the institutions. In the workplace, the workers would take power to control the conditions of their lives." ^*

In 2004, Zinn published a companion volume with Anthony Arnove, titled Voices of A People's History of the United States. The book (and an accompanying CD) parallels A People's History in structure, supplementing it with material from frequently overlooked primary sources.

Criticisms

Although widely praised in leftist political circles, the book is not without its critics, from the conservative Dan Flynn to the liberal Michael Kazin of Dissent. [http://www.dissentmagazine.org/menutest/articles/wi04/kazin.htm The main argument of those critical of A People's History is that it is too focused on perceived class conflict in the United States, and wrongfully attributes sinister motives and intentions to the American political elite.

They argue that Zinn's portrayal of U.S. Founding Fathers as "leaders of the new aristocracy" who cynically sought to replace one form of oppressive elite control with another, is disingenuous. They argue that while the founders' rhetoric contrasted with their actions -- in that some of the founders were themselves slave owners -- they did establish the most liberal democracy in the world and codified into law basic human rights and that these views, reflected in public and private documents, were fundamentally held beliefs, and not just rhetoric. They also find fault with Zinn for what they say is his selective use of the experience of immigrants, focusing only on the hardships faced by immigrants and not on the success that many millions have and continue to experience.

Current editions

External links

• People's History on the web
• series
• "Howard Zinn's History Lessons" by Michael Kazin
• A People's History of the United States online text
• "Master of Deceit" by Dan Flynn

Subject Bibliography

• Finkelman, Paul, Slavery and the Founders: Race and Liberty in the Age of Jefferson (M E Sharpe Inc.: 1996) ISBN 1563245906

1980 books | United States history books | A People's History of the United States | Det amerikanska folkets historia