Rating: 
Summary: Which people's history?
Review: Before I get to the criticisms, the good point about Mr. Zinn's book is that he does include many historical anecdotes and information that aren't commonly covered. He is not a bad writer- although I've seen better- and he usually seems to be intellectually honest, at least on his own terms. The book's bad points begin with its title. "A People's History of the United States, 1492-Present" is a bit of subtle falsehood. Of course Zinn knows that the United States didn't exist until 1776, but he apparently hopes that he can tar the political system of the United States with every atrocity committed by people with white skin in North America since Columbus. Furthermore, Zinn's use of the tired cliche "The People" to describe what, throughout most of American history, was a small minority of malcontents- the far left- is a downright embarrassing reversion to New Left jargon. In Zinn's world, a few thousand anarchist revolutionaries were an authentic representation of the People; while the 9,726,967 citizens who voted for the capitalist candidates for President in 1884, evidently don't count as "people." This theme is prevalent throughout the book- straitjacketed by Marxist rhetoric, any poor people who disagree with Zinn aren't "the People"; they are "mobs", "vigilantes", etc. Zinn's benign contempt for the actual People he purports to be writing about is also evident when he discusses American anti-communism. Zinn, at times, makes an effort to be intellectualy honest in acknowledging (or at least alluding to) the enormous crimes perpetrated by Communist governments- but takes no lesson from this fact; after stumbling on the truth, he dusts himself off and continues to spout the assumption that only bourgeois interests or false consciousness could've explained American anti-Communism, rather than a legitimate concern for human rights that was absolutely compelled by circumstances. Basically, Zinn's greatest failing is his inability to escape the dogmatic Marxist determinism that was the vogue when he was a young man. Marxist analysis was not any good even when it was new, and after a century and a half of disproof, to revisit it is like reading a book of alchemy or astrology. But Zinn earns two stars for the tireless effort he undoubtedly put into writing this book, which, although it fails as an "alternative" to mainstream American history texts, is at times an informative source for the history of American *dissenters*.
Rating: 
Summary: A Classic! Everyone Should Read This Book!
Review: It is impossible to overstate the importance of reading a true history of this country and what effect that history has on the events of today. In school we are fed pap and lies about the past of America. I wept at the injustices this book details and, unfortunately, some of the same type of thing goes on in this country today. This book (and others by the author) opens your eyes and gives you a fresh look at EVERYTHING you see in the news. You'll thank yourself for buying and reading one of the most important books I've read. I gave copies to friends and family as gifts.
Rating: 
Summary: when this book is good
Review: this book is only good when paired with traditional history texts or even right-leaning books. this book is by no means impassionate and isn't meant to be. Zinn repeatedly looks at american history through a marxist construction of society. This approach is good because it is different, but is obviously a constrained look at US history. This book shouldn't cause one to formulate their final interpretation of american history. instead, it should inform readers that the US is hardly the romanticized represenative of freedom and prosperity in the world. Instead, US history was mostly formed by people who have been the same for all time, in all places. To see some kind of higher virtue in our government and economy is simplistic and downright wrong. US history is not simple and not black and white. This is the strength and weakness of Zinn's book.
Rating:
Summary: Useful and nessecary
Review: It's one thing to criticize one's country; it's something else to ignore crimes and inequality out of a misguided sense of patriotism or loyalty. True, Zinn's account is one-sided, but that's the point -- he's presenting a side that's been ignored by mainstream historians. This is an important book.
Rating:
Summary: Moving towards a compassionate history
Review: Zinn's book is an utterly necessary first step in moving towards a more compassionate view of history and hence a more compassionate society. In giving an account of persecuted groups, Zinn shows us that only by including and indeed focusing on these heretofore excluded groups can we begin to make amends for past wrongs. A cheerleader-viewpoint American history benefits only those few already in power; it does nothing to initiate social change or alleviate the suffering of the many. If you think our government is just fine the way it is and that poor, dispossessed, and unhappy people should "just get over it", then perhaps you should look elsewhere for informational sources (say, Nike ads or Bush speeches). If, however, you're interested in the truth, minorities, and social activism, then this book is for you.
Rating: 
Summary: Such a Waste of time.
Review: Please do not buy this book. The author is probably making large sums of money for teaching fake history. Although I agree that the 'peoples' side of the story does need to be told, he ignores numerous facts, creates his own facts, and uses misquotes to express and to 'prove' his points. I don't think that college professors should be permitted to profit from lying to their students and readers.
Rating:
Summary: The U.S. does not exist!
Review: Every consolidation of power commences with a declaration of unity among the future leaders. The sanitized and well edited conception of the ensuing history of the entity edifies a narritave that bolsters the collective esteem and sense of entitlement of the ruling class while negating the collective subjective veracity of the experience of the secondary and tertiary classes. This is all well and good for the perpetuation of the status quo but does little good for the thinking person. Howard Zinn warns us in the beginning of his book that he is writing a biased history of the United States if only to balance the weight of the right leaning selectivity of the consensual narrative that is commonly accepted. The history of human culture cosistantly demonstrates a pattern of stronger cultures dominating weaker ones (for what ever specific reasons that one is stronger than the other). No on can argue with this. Also, as we have seen in history, with the previously oppressed subsequently becoming the oppressors, to merely favor the currently oppressed (and vice versa villifying the the dominant) may result in precious little in the long run. What I like about Zinn's book is that it extensively serves to maintain a balance of perspective. For further insight into the ecology of cultural evolution, I would reccommend Robert Wright's recent book, "Nonzero, the Logic of Human Destiny". Also Jared Diamond's Pulitzer Prize winning "Guns, Germs, and Steel." This is a very informative book. It very explicitly unmasks how the collective need for a sense of continuity and destiny throughout the difficult and multi-dimentional process of nation building has distorted our perspective by filling our minds with a well tailored view of history. Andrew Carnegie said "Give a dog a name." Our dog is named the United States. In order to preserve the integrity of this dog, an extensive debate and effort of self-definition have colored its past and I think Zinn's work is a fine cornerstone to honestly interpreting its future.
Rating:
Summary: FREEDOM . . .
Review: What of our freedom in America? That is the real question. This freedom we 'enjoy', is it an illusion? An integral part of our control? Or is it simply 'freedom', in its purest form, that we may exercise our minds and bodies with the least restrictions within this system we live? Yes, it is a system, but one that provides us with freedom --- and it is this quandary Zinn must address. The quandary of determining our system's rightness, its goodness, or its evil. Because freedom in America is a reality Zinn and others of his creed ignore so to create their 'boogymen' of capitalism, and class war. Their argument requires the ingredient of apparent control, but America's 'freedom' throws a monkey wrench into that argument because it incoluates 'control'. Or does it?
Rating:
Summary: THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY - UNCUT
Review: I see alot of readers disagree with either the content of the book, or the way it is written, etc. Yes, this book is different than what we've read in school. Yes, this book is biased. As are the "clean" versions in school. You would be biased too if you were the child fired, or shot, for walking out of a factory in attempt to escape oppressive work conditions. This book tells the other side. All sides need to be considered in all situations. History isn't perfect. It isn't simple. Politics are not simple. This book tells history the way it happened, uncut, and we need to remember these lessons to prepare for future decisions. Why does oppression happen? Because someone is making money off it. From Columbus to today's government. - RAISED REPUBLICAN, GROWING TOWARDS SOCIALISM (we need to look at the big picture and the long run)
Rating:
Summary: Great stuff for the uninitiated
Review: I have a fondness for this book because I bought it to celebrate after teaching my first college class in history the fall of 1997. It's a good way for the uninitiated to learn the "other side" of US history. To be fair, Zinn gives both the left and right their just deserts (his comments on Bill Clinton, Harry Truman, and the Socialist Party's failure to speak out against racism and war in the early 1900s should give pause to those who think Zinn is too far to the left. I do wish, however, that Zinn was more critical of the excesses of the "New Left" and sexual revolution). The only real complaint that I have about this otherwise great book is that it doesn't have footnotes to give you the exact source of each quote, which would have been helpful in many cases. But the bibliography that the late Professor Zinn provides may be of some help for professional historians or those who just like to dig deeper.
| 
