Issues Navigator

Global Challenges

Strategic Regions

Domestic Debates

Tag cloud

See All Tags

August 26, 2010 |  7 comments |  Print  Book Reviews  

Paul-Robert Lookman

Howard Zinn: "A People's History of the United States"

Paul-Robert Lookman:

After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, the US emerged as the world's sole superpower. Its reliance on the reach of the Pentagon to compensate for a waning hegemony in other domains, and the necessity to contend with shrinking resources, rising adversaries, and growing resistance, led to a record number of US interventions. To comprehend America's rationale for its post-cold war global role, one has to understand the less widely known side of America's history. When Martin Luther King Jr. stated that the US was the most violent of all nations, he would only have needed to point to history books such as A People's History of the United States in support of his view. Since its publication in 1980, this great work by the late American historian and political scientist Howard Zinn has been chronicling American history from the bottom up, throwing out the official version of history taught in schools.

Critics claimed that Zinn was unpatriotic. He responded that patriotism also requires dissent, activism, and a critical assessment of standard takes on history. The World War II Army Air Force veteran - an early and outspoken critic of the US war in Vietnam - was 87 when he died January 27, 2010. Too bad Howard was not around to document the first black President's failures. In Zinn's view these were ever so similar to the other ambitious politicians' grab for more land and power, at the expense of the people. Asked a few weeks before his demise how the newly elected president Barack Obama could ensure transformational change, Zinn answered:

"Withdraw troops from Iraq and Afghanistan as fast as ships and planes can carry them home, declare that the United States will not engage in aggressive wars, renounce the Bush doctrine of preventive war and the Carter doctrine, which threatens force to control Mideast oil, and start dismantling our military bases overseas. He should announce that we are henceforth a peace-loving nation, no longer a target for terrorists and no longer engaging in terrorism ourselves. He should reduce the military establishment and the military budget down to a bare minimum and create a jobs program for young people instead of recruiting them for military service."

The similarity to the quote Obama used during his Cairo speech of June 4, 2009 is striking: "Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: ‘I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be'." A pledge the current president has yet to redeem. With regard to Omaba's first year in office, Zinn wrote in The Nation of January 21, 2010:

"I've been searching hard for a highlight. I don't see any kind of a highlight in his actions and policies. I think people are dazzled by Obama's rhetoric, and that people ought to begin to understand that Obama is going to be a mediocre president - which means, in our time, a dangerous president."

A People's History of the United States possesses something few history books offer: the potential to re-wire how people think of their government, their history, their relationship to democracy, and their own political agency. An updated hardcover edition is on sale at HarperCollinsPublishers. With Howard Zinn's explicit permission, an online version has been made available at http://www.historyisaweapon.com/zinnapeopleshistory.html.

Paul Lookman is a political activist. He writes a blog on international politics in Dutch and English called "Geopolitiek in perspectief" (http://geopolitiek-in-perspectief.blogspot.com/).

After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, the US emerged as the world's sole superpower. Its reliance on the reach of the Pentagon to compensate for a waning hegemony in other domains, and the necessity to contend with shrinking resources, rising adversaries, and growing resistance, led to a record number of US interventions. To comprehend America's rationale for its post-cold war global role, one has to understand the less widely known side of America's history. When Martin Luther King Jr. stated that the US was the most violent of all nations, he would only have needed to point to history books such as A People's History of the United States in support of his view. Since its publication in 1980, this great work by the late American historian and political scientist Howard Zinn has been chronicling American history from the bottom up, throwing out the official version of history taught in schools.

Critics claimed that Zinn was unpatriotic. He responded that patriotism also requires dissent, activism, and a critical assessment of standard takes on history. The World War II Army Air Force veteran - an early and outspoken critic of the US war in Vietnam - was 87 when he died January 27, 2010. Too bad Howard was not around to document the first black President's failures. In Zinn's view these were ever so similar to the other ambitious politicians' grab for more land and power, at the expense of the people. Asked a few weeks before his demise how the newly elected president Barack Obama could ensure transformational change, Zinn answered:

"Withdraw troops from Iraq and Afghanistan as fast as ships and planes can carry them home, declare that the United States will not engage in aggressive wars, renounce the Bush doctrine of preventive war and the Carter doctrine, which threatens force to control Mideast oil, and start dismantling our military bases overseas. He should announce that we are henceforth a peace-loving nation, no longer a target for terrorists and no longer engaging in terrorism ourselves. He should reduce the military establishment and the military budget down to a bare minimum and create a jobs program for young people instead of recruiting them for military service."

The similarity to the quote Obama used during his Cairo speech of June 4, 2009 is striking: "Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: ‘I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be'." A pledge the current president has yet to redeem. With regard to Omaba's first year in office, Zinn wrote in The Nation of January 21, 2010:

"I've been searching hard for a highlight. I don't see any kind of a highlight in his actions and policies. I think people are dazzled by Obama's rhetoric, and that people ought to begin to understand that Obama is going to be a mediocre president - which means, in our time, a dangerous president."

A People's History of the United States possesses something few history books offer: the potential to re-wire how people think of their government, their history, their relationship to democracy, and their own political agency. An updated hardcover edition is on sale at HarperCollinsPublishers. With Howard Zinn's explicit permission, an online version has been made available at http://www.historyisaweapon.com/zinnapeopleshistory.html.

Paul Lookman is a political activist. He writes a blog on international politics in Dutch and English called "Geopolitiek in perspectief" (http://geopolitiek-in-perspectief.blogspot.com/).

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this Article! What's this?

 
 
Comments
Darrell Calvin Brown

September 9, 2010

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Is this article an article which focuses on what its title says or is it merely another faulty attempt to malign the person and policies of the President of the United States of America ?
 
Ximena  Benavente

November 10, 2010

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
I certainly do not agree with Zinn's statement of "a mediocre president is a dangerous president." What are the parameters that led to such vague statement about President Obama? The latter, received a country almost in ruins, that inevitably fell apart as soon as he took power. Obama wasn't the mastermind behind all the faulty decisions of the Bush doctrine, and only now we are seeing the effects of the massive defense spending. Americas intrusive nature has downsized domestic policy-making. We should think that people in this country need basic healthcare, decent pensions, standard education and improvement of basic needs. This of course does not get accomplish based on two things. The first, an outrageous military budget that creates more deficit (this coming frmo the previous administration). Second, American corporatism. So actually the question should be whether American policy-makers should restructure their democratic framework and analyze their influences into this over-capitalist system, and if the war is worth the price?
 
Paul-Robert  Lookman

November 12, 2010

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Ms Benavente, with “a mediocre president is a dangerous president", Zinn probably meant to say that the dangerous global challenges the US faces require a strong president who can get things done. I am convinced that Obama means well but was - when taking office - too naïve and inexperienced for the job and therefore became a prisoner of the powerful lobbies. As regards US “democratic framework”, one should perhaps put the blame on its “pork-barrel system of politics which puts what passes for democracy up for sale to the highest bidders” (source: British journalist Alan Hart).

I agree that Obama faced tremendous domestic (economic) challenges, but also feel the Democrats can’t complain about the policies that led to the current disaster. These did not begin with Ronald Reagan, but with Jimmy Carter and accelerated under President Bill Clinton. And let’s not forget that during the presidential elections, one of Obama’s primary constituencies was financial institutions…

After the mid-term elections, there may be some hope from … Tea Party representatives like Rand Paul, who seem to argue for serious cuts in American military spending, see his election video on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76lb9kAbXr4

I am writing an article under the caption ”De legitieme grieven van de Tea Party; komt er een rem op het Pentagon?” (The Tea Party’s legitimate grievances; will it put the brakes on the Pentagon’s runaway budget), which will appear on http://geopolitiek-in-perspectief.blogspot.com/ early next week. You can perhaps run the Dutch text through an online translator.
 
Alexander Josef Pilic

November 18, 2010

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Isolationism in American foreign policy has led to the need of U.S. military intervention in two world wars. This lesson from history should not be forgotten. All presidents from Roosevelt to Obama were aware of this. Each added his personal "flavour" to America's global presence but would never have been able to withdraw from the world stage.

Isolationism simply is no option for Washington, because it would create greater problems than it would solve, contrary to what pacifists claim. The reality is that the world is better off with the United States acting as a "policeman", rather than with a multipolar chaos. Even if tea-party candidates run the Pentagon one day, they will be reminded of that fact very quickly.
 
Paul-Robert  Lookman

November 22, 2010

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Alexander Josef Pilic:

Howard Zinn never argued for American isolationism on the world stage, but rather for a single standard for its domestic and global policy. In other words: no double standards, the rule of international law applies to all.

Samer Araabi has written a review of the interesting book “The End of Arrogance: America in the Global Competition of Ideas” by Steven Weber and Bruce W. Jentleson. See: http://www.ips-dc.org/articles/review_the_end_of_arrogance. From his review I should like to quote:

“American failures to address key global issues such as poverty, disease, and global warming have tarnished our image as protectors of the weak; our inability to protect our own citizens from unexpected disasters has become an international embarrassment. By all accounts, America’s unipolar moment has passed.”

and

“…the solution to America’s rising obselescence lies primarily in a doctrine of “mutuality,” the idea that our primary objectives should serve shared interests, not only selfish ones. In other words, it is no longer feasible to hold one standard for a domestic constituency and another for global populations. Each must be treated with the same respect, dignity, and autonomy.”
 
John  Hadjisky

February 5, 2011

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Howard Zinn and Intelligent Design?

In the current political environment, the very same quasi-intellectual, academic left that gave rise to Howard Zinn, is highly invested in defending President Obama, almost no matter what the President does. Would Zinn have savaged Obama for utterly abandoning his unambiguous promise to close Gitmo? We can only speculate, but we know the general position of Zinn's sympathizers, which appears to be, Obama is chided, but mostly gets a pass on Gitmo so he can deliver something called "Health Care Reform" (which in reality turned out to be watered-down health insurance reform, and after the mid-terms, even that isn't assured)

In the current political environment, Zinn has more in common with the isolationist wing of the Tea Party/Libertarian/Natural Law/Prairie Populist movement, than he does with any movement on the left. Would Zinn have the stones to acknowledge this?

Probably not; Zinn strikes me as mostly narrative, and only concerned with substance when it is convenient. At a certain point, one has to acknowledge that, 30 years after publication, having been read by millions, and taught at some of the nation's most prestigious and influential universities and prep schools, nevertheless 60-80% of the American electorate consistently reject Zinn's ideas and policies, time after time. Zinn's masterwork has been translated into virtually all languages, and heavily promoted behind the Iron Curtain and in the developing work; yet immigrants still want to move here in large numbers.

Still, he's worth a read, because he is a provocative writer who engages students. Similarly, and to preserve the peace at school board meetings, I am tempted to suggest that students ought to be exposed to the Creation Science/Intelligent Design movement. That movement isn't very rigorous either, but it certainly excites students and hopefully engages them to learn more. Give both Zinn and the ID folks a chance to be heard on their own terms, before moving on to critical perspectives of both.

But before we do any of this in schools, the poor dears MUST be able to read, write, and count. Maybe this material (Zinn and ID) belongs in community colleges and, dare I say, universities (Zinn is already there!)
 
Unregistered User

November 27, 2012

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
The best book ever written on US htisory is "People's History of the United States" by Howard Zinn. I read it back in high school, and it made me want to be a historian.What's great about it it that it's a bottom-up htisory of the US, told from the point of view of ordinary people: the native Americans, workers, immigrants, rather than all Presidents all the time.References :
 

Commenting has been deactivated in the archive. We appreciate your comments on our more recent articles at atlantic-community.org


Community

You are in the archive of all articles published on atlantic-community.org from 2007 to 2012. To read the latest articles from our open think tank and network with community members, please go to our new website