Rating: 
Summary: Interesting, informative, but extremely biased
Review: Howard Zinn's book is interesting, well written, and informative about the dark side of American history. That dark side is often not discussed at all, much less adequately, so the book is useful in filling gaps. Unfortunately, the book is also extremely biased (Zinn describes his approach on pages 9 ff). As signaled by the title itself, Zinn appears to approach history as merely an element in class struggle. He apparently believes that normal history is merely a set of distortions by the victors, and his job is to write from a different (distorted) perspective. This has about as much to do with seeking truth as Corcoran's defense arguments in the OJ trial. As one example, if one knew nothing about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, one would believe from Zinn that they were merely the results of a clever ploy by the rich landowners to "buy" enough support from the middle class to assure continuation of the system that kept the rich rich. One would not know that these documents and the ideas they reflect have been profoundly important not only in the United States, but throughout the world. In reading about the Cold War, one would emerge from Zinn's account believing that the U.S. government had driven the arms race throughout the 1970s and 1980s. The Soviets, it seems, had no role in all this. Zinn fails to mention that after the end of the Cold War, what emerged from Soviet and then Russian sources strongly corroborated most of the U.S. view of that Cold War: the Soviet missiles were real, their massive army for Europe was real, and their military expenditures were, in fact, much HIGHER--in terms of the burden they placed on the Soviet economy--that we realized. By the time of Gorbachev, thinking Soviets had recognized that the security threat (NATO) that they were using to drive their sytem was bogus, and that, in fact, it was the Soviet Union that was out of line. In discussing the Rosenbergs, Zinn leaves the reader with the impression that they were framed. He conveniently fails to mention the substantial literature of the last fifteen years, nearly all of which tends to confirm that they were guilty as charged. Zinn's account of the Gulf War, which I know a great deal about, is also highly distorted and cynical, but by the time I reached that material I could have written his material for him. I knew what to expect: the war was nothing but George Bush's attempt to gain political points, the United States was savage in its bombing (the precise opposite of what was true), the U.S. invented fears of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (even though it turned out that Iraq's programs were much more extensive and farther along that we realized), etc. Distortions, distortions, and selective semi-facts. My bottom-line recommendation is as follows. For someone who already understands a good deal of history, political philosophy, and logic, Zinn's book could be valuable in challenging beliefs and providing uncomfortable information, some of which is both troubling and true. In contrast, the book could damage readers with less background: they might actually BELIEVE Zinn's view of history. That might be a good start for becoming an unemployed Marxist (job opportunities are not great for those trained in a thoroughly discredited ideology), but I can't see much value for anything else.
Rating: 
Summary: Open your eyes to the real story!
Review: All people that think the United States were formed the way the teachers taught should read the book and get a grip on the reality of life.
Rating:
Summary: Balance your education with the other side of history
Review: Public school textbooks teach history from the point of view of the U.S. government and ruling class. If you want the other side of the story -- if you're willing to challenge what you've been told by those textbooks -- Zinn's is the book to read.
Rating: 
Summary: A Worthwhile Read, Despite a Misleading Title
Review: To use the title of a "People's History" is misleading. While the author is up front in saying he will be selective, the title still infers something that it is not. Still, it is an interesting read and helps expand our depth of America's history for those groups traditionally ignored. One question begs to be asked about this book. Based upon some of the comments for this work, and its abridged edition, can its sales be weighted by teachers making it a required reading? Despite this question, I can recommend it to anyone interested in American history.
Rating:
Summary: A History of the United States for the Rest of Us
Review: What some of the readers below don't seem to get is that this book is not INTENDED to be a balanced look at American history. There IS no balanced look at history. Every historian brings his own biases and preconceptions to the table. Zinn makes this point early on in the book; and, to his immense credit, doesn't EVER claim to be fair or impartial or balanced. This is a history from the point of view of the rest of us: the native population, the slaves, the railroad workers, the child laborers, women, factory workers, soldiers, and everyone else whose voice has not been represented or even heard through previous histories. Most histories are written from the point of view of the dominant affluent culture. It would naturally be difficult for the dominant culture to express the idea that their success is built on other people's misery; nobody likes looking bad in their own eyes. However, facts are facts: Millions of natives WERE systematically driven off their lan! d and killed, millions of africans WERE kept in the most degrading forms of slavery, thousands of workers WERE beaten and killed for daring to act for a better life, etc. These WERE the conditions of life for the other side. Closing our eyes does not help.
Rating:
Summary: Zinn speaks for previously quiet
Review: It makes me laugh when people say that Zinn's history lacks credibility. People like that think exactly how the all-powerful U.S. government wants you to think. Just because they cut it out of your high school textbook doesn't mean it's not true.
Rating:
Summary: Open Mind to read "Other Side"
Review: No matter one's political leanings, this entertaining and informative book details the side of history we weren't taught - or is it indoctinated? - in high school. The only thing preventing me from giving this much needed kick-in the-rear book by Howard Zinn a five star rating is the fact that he presumes that only Women, children, social misfits and non-Europeans (ie. minorities) are the ones to wear the - excuse me - "White" hats; or, in other words, these people were exploited and victimized by us Mainstream White folks, namely heterosexual males of Western European stock, unabashed perpetrators of evil. If one were to take Mr. Zinn's word for everything about history he or she would be as wrong as the naive acceptance of that garbage spoon-fed to many of us back in high school. On the other hand, a book like Mr. Zinn's is much needed to give balance to a history. Let's give him five stars for guts. Though brilliant and articulate in most respects,! and well-researched in presenting the flip side, A People's History of the USA fails to acknowledge that not all White heterosexual males are the villains in history.
Rating: 
Summary: A socialist's unsubstantiated view
Review: If Zinn is unfamiliar with the usage of footnotes, his publisher should have clued him in. This somewhat interesting take on American history lacks credibility. I wonder how much of the money he earned from this bestseller was shared with his comrades. I hope he saved some for a ticket to China.
Rating:
Summary: "Freedom Has Nothing to Fear From the Truth"
Review: What the unhappy reviewers below forget to mention is that Zinn never promises a "balanced" treatment. We all know Carnegie supplied cheap steal. We all know that Columbus was a great sailor. All Zinn does is tell us the things we weren't told when we were growing up. The only legitimate criticism one can make is in relation to the facts. If Zinn is wrong on the facts, then let's criticize. If not, then what are we afraid of? Does it matter that Columbus committed genocide? Does it matter that Andrew Jackson was a ruthless killer of Indians? Does it matter that Truman's top military advisors (and Winston Churchill) believed Japan was defeated before the dropping of the atomic bombs? These are simple "yes/no" questions. People who need to feel "pride" based on the actions of others, long dead, may not feel comfortable answering those questions. But they need to be answered so that the atrocities of the past are not so easily repeated.
Rating:
Summary: Finally- The History of those who went silent for years
Review: Howard Zinn is a brilliant man. Everyone should read A People's History. Open your Eyes.
| 
