Goodnight professor Zinn

evince

evince

Truthmatters
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/28/us/28zinn.html


Howard Zinn, Historian, Dies at 87 Sign in to Recommend

Howard Zinn, an author, teacher and political activist whose book “A People’s History of the United States” became a million-selling leftist alternative to mainstream texts, died Wednesday in Santa Monica, Calif. He was 87 and lived in Auburndale, Mass.
 
history marches on along towards a liberal path.

you are just a crack in its surface.

Here comes a number 2 can right at ya
 
Zinn's work was not meant to be a complete history or a liberal's version of history. He was an unabashed liberal, that is true. And his book looks at history thru those eyes.

But much of what he wrote is the truth. The idea that there is only one way to view history is ignorant. For decades we have been fed a version of history that justified any actions taken by the US and her allies.

But there were consequences of those actions that were ignored. When Columbus landed in the New World, he brought diseases that wiped out entire populations. To call him an explorer and the discoverer of the New World, without addressing the damages done, is ignorant.

History is not a single view of events. It is a study of the multitude of views, effects, consequences and actions. To declare only one facet as accurate and any others as lies only continues the ignorance, and serves no one.
 
Southern Man said:
A history text should be all truth, not just "much". :palm:
Click to expand...

First of all, Zinn did not write a history textbook. The fact that his book was adopted for use by some schools as part of their history courses does not change what he wrote.

Second of all, he did write truth. In the past the history has been written by the victors and the conquerors. While it does not lie, it also does not present the entire truth. Losing a battle or a war does not remove your viewpoint from history.
 
Southern Man said:
So your position is that "A People's" is not used as a stand-alone classroom text book?
Click to expand...

Did I say that? I said he didn't write it as a textbook. He penned a nonfiction book on histiry that sought to present new viewpoints.
 
I have never had a decent history class that was limited to a single "stand alone" text. To study history from only one view is to ignore too much of what should be learned.
 
Nevertheless, many, many teachers have used this as a stand-alone text. He obviously knew that, and encouraged it by re-printing several times past its original 5000 copies.

Even liberal historians were uneasy with Zinn. Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. once said: "I know he regards me as a dangerous reactionary. And I don't take him very seriously. He's a polemicist, not a historian."
Click to expand...
http://www.newsobserver.com/419/story/308217.html
 
Southern Man said:
Nevertheless, many, many teachers have used this as a stand-alone text. He obviously knew that, and encouraged it by re-printing several times past its original 5000 copies.

http://www.newsobserver.com/419/story/308217.html
Click to expand...

I see nothing in that article that claimed it was used as a stand alone text. I also see nothing that shows he knew and encouraged using his book as a stand alone text.

In the article you linked he is quoted saying "My idea was the orthodox viewpoint has already been done a thousand times." That is exactly what we need in the education system. We need to present as many factual views of events as possible.




Everything I have seen shows his book was used in addition to standard history texts. I have not seen anything that claims his writings were untrue.

Why do you have a problem with him presenting different views of the events in history? His writings are not lies as far as I have been able to determine.


As far as your comment "He obviously knew that, and encouraged it by re-printing several times past its original 5000 copies.", do you expect an author to refuse additional printings of their book? That does not mean he encouraged it as a stand alone text. It means there was a demand for his book and his writings.
 
A People's History of the United States, published in 1980 with a first printing of 5000 copies, went on to sell over two million. To this day some 128,000 new copies are sold each year. That alone made Zinn perhaps the single most influential historian whose works have reached multitudes of Americans. Indeed, Zinn found that his book was regularly adopted as a text in high schools and most surprisingly, in many colleges and universities.
Click to expand...
http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2010/01/america_the_awfulhoward_zinns.html
 
Zinn's opus, A People's History of the United States, 1492-Present, has gone through five editions, multiple printings, sold more than two million copies, and has been assigned in thousands of high school and college history classes since first published in 1980. Zinn is quite clear about the bias of the book, "With all its limitations, it is a history disrespectful of governments and respectful of people's movements of resistance."

Even historians who don't agree with Zinn's historical perspective acknowledge him as the most influential historian in America. But Daniel Flynn, executive director of Accuracy in Academia says Zinn puts theory first and facts second because he simplistically divides "mankind into two groups—and only two: oppressors and oppressed." Public historian Larry Dewitt decries the lack of balance in Zinn's work, "...we study history to find out what happened in the past and why. For Zinn, and like-minded historians, the discipline of history is merely a tool to be used in the pursuit of political cause."
Click to expand...
http://teachinghistory.org/nhec-blog/23675
 
I see you found references that say his book was used in classrooms as a text, and that he abridged his book to make it more useable in the classroom.

That does not change the fact that he did not set out to write a textbook. You also have not shown anything that shows it was used as a standalone text.



But you are refusing to answer the question of why you harbor so much animosity for this book. It does not lie. You have claimed to be a champion of truth, and yet you seem to hate this man who presented truths that have been ignored by mainstream educators.
 
In other words, if actual history doesn't support your distorted view of the world, then re-write history.

Zinn was a worthless piece of shit.
 
Southern Man said:
In other words, if actual history doesn't support your distorted view of the world, then re-write history.

Zinn was a worthless piece of shit.
Click to expand...

In other words, if someone presents facts that show the brutality and oppression that has been ignored in mordern history classes, you should attack the messenger and declare the message as "revisionist".


You want some myopic "America the Beautiful" version of history taught to our children. And anyone who questions that or presents a viewpoint of the people who were downtrodden, oppressed, or beaten, should be banned?

Maybe you would prefer those McCarthyist history texts of the 50s be used exclusively?



Columbus was a great explorer. That has been written in many, many history texts. But none of them included the passages from his journals that said [speaking of the Arawak people] "...They would make fine servants.... With fifty men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want."

To ignore his journal entries in favor of some sanitized propaganda is nothing short of criminal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top