A People's History of the United States: Highlights from the Twentieth Century

by Howard Zinn, Matt Damon (Narrated by)

Known for its lively, clear prose as well as its scholarly research, Zinn's A People's History of the United States is the only volume to tell America's story from the point of view of -- and in the words of -- its women, factory workers, African-Americans, Native Americans, working poor, and immigrant laborers. Here we learn that many of our country's greatest battles -- labor laws, women's rights, racial equality -- were carried out at the grassroots level, against steel-willed resistance. This edition of A People's History of the United States features insightful analysis of some of the most important events in this country in the past one hundred years.

Featuring a preface and afterword read by the author himself, this audio continues Howard Zinn's important contribution to a complete and balanced understanding of American history.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Audiobook, Politics, American History, American, War

9 pages, Audio Cassette

Published February 4, 2003

About the author

Howard Zinn was an American historian, playwright, philosopher, socialist intellectual and World War II veteran. He was chair of the history and social sciences department at Spelman College, and a political science professor at Boston University. Zinn wrote more than 20 books, including his best-selling and influential A People's History of the United States in 1980. In 2007, he published a version of it for younger readers, A Young People's History of the United States.

Zinn described himself as "something of an anarchist, something of a socialist. Maybe a democratic socialist." He wrote extensively about the civil rights movement, the anti-war movement and labor history of the United States. His memoir, You Can't Be Neutral on a Moving Train (Beacon Press, 1994), was also the title of a 2004 documentary about Zinn's life and work. Zinn died of a heart attack in 2010, at the age of 87.

Reviews

[Diane · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this so much that I'm going to resort to hyperbole: If you read only one book about American history, let it be this one.

This is not a typical history book. Instead of telling the stories of the victors, Howard Zinn focused on those who have been oppressed in the United States. The minorities. The protesters. The downtrodden.

In the preface to the updated edition about the Twentieth Century, Zinn wrote: "It is obvious in the very first pages of the larger People's History, when I tell about Columbus and emphasize not his navigational skill and fortitude in making his way to the Western Hemisphere, but his cruel treatment of the Indians he found here, torturing them, exterminating them in his greed for gold, his desperation to bring riches to his patrons back in Spain. In other words, my focus is not on the achievements of the heroes of traditional history, but on all those people who were the victims of those achievements, who suffered silently or fought back magnificently."

I listened to this on audio CD (read by the talented Matt Damon), and the edition focused on the events of the Twentieth Century, including the Vietnam War, the women's movement, the Civil Rights Era, the Clinton presidency and the infamous Bush v. Gore election of 2000. My favorite sections were about the 60s: civil rights, war protests, and the rise of feminism. The complete edition of People's History is more than 700 pages and starts back in 1492 (when "Columbus sailed the ocean blue...").

I first read Zinn's book back in the 90s, but I didn't fully appreciate it. Having more life experience and seeing how much power the rich and powerful really have, I got so much more out of this book this time. I've even referenced it in the sociology class I teach, because so many elements are still relevant.

In his afterword, Zinn wrote: "I wanted, in writing this book, to awaken a greater consciousness of class conflict, racial injustice, sexual inequality, and national arrogance." Sir, you have succeeded.

[Clif Hostetler · Rating 5 out of 5]

This history has details that are skipped over by most historians. This is a history from the viewpoint of the powerless who are viewed as the losers from the standpoint of the winners (i.e the one's who write history). Howard Zinn pretty well summarizes the perspective from which he writes this history as follows:

"I prefer to tell the story of the discovery of America from the viewpoint of the Arawak, of the Constitution from the stand point of the slaves, of Andrew Jackson as seen by the Cherokees, of the Civil War seen by the New York Irish, of the Mexican War as seen by the deserting soldiers in Scott’s army, of the rise of industrialism as seen by the young women in the Lowell textile mills, of the Spanish American War as seen by the Cubans, the conquest of the Philippines as seen by black soldiers on Luzon, the Gilded Age as seen by southern farmers, the first World War as seen by socialists, the Second World War as seen by pacifists, the New Deal as seen by blacks of Harlem, the post war American empire as seen by peons in Latin America.”

There's part of me that wants to insist that all Americans should read this to have a more complete understanding of their history. But I know at 768 pages this is a long read that not many people are going to read.

One problem is that the end of the book is becoming dated. The book was originally published in 1980 (won the National Book Award) and has been revised frequently with the latest being 2005. The version I listened to included the September 11 attacks and the bombing of Afghanistan, but there was no mention of the second Iraq War. Sadly I noticed that all of the social problems mentioned in the book as existing in the 80s and 90s have only gotten worse since. For example, the disparity of wealth has continued to get worse, and there's no end in sight to this trend.

Instead of trying the impossible task of summarizing the contents of this book, I will note one bit of minor trivia I learned from this book that is the answer to the question, who is the only person imprisioned because of the Iran-Contra affair?

In Poindexter's hometown of Odon, Indiana, a street was renamed to John Poindexter Street. Bill Breeden, a former minister, stole the street's sign in protest of the Iran–Contra affair. He claimed that he was holding it for a ransom of $30 million, in reference to the amount of money given to Iran to transfer to the Contras. He was later arrested and confined to prison, making him, as satirically noted by Howard Zinn, "the only person to be imprisoned as a result of the Iran–Contra Scandal".

This is another example of how the real criminals get off scot-free, and the ones trying to take action to publicize the injustice get the shaft.

The following is a link to an excerpt from the book about "women's silent sadness."
http://eepurl.com/ipc_9o

[Olivia Y · Rating 4 out of 5]

great if you’ve always wanted to read this book but were daunted by the length. but Matt Damon shouldn’t have narrated it lmao

[Steve Chaput · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'd read the book years ago but this was a chance to listen to the updated 'Twentieth Century' sections.

Matt Damon does a decent job narrating the older material, but Zinn picks up the new chapters (Clinton, G.W. Bush and post 9/11 era) himself. A different history, as Zinn set out to do, from what we all learned in elementary school through college. I think, given the past year, many of us have forgotten that the Clinton era might not have been the last hurrah for 'liberalism' that the DNC tried to sell us.

Even if you've read the book already it's informative to remind yourself that there is a progressive side to America that just needs to be reawakened.

[Becky · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars. (Review of audio version only as it is different from the book.)

I enjoyed this quite a bit. I found a lot of it to be interesting, and I really enjoyed the personal perspectives shown in the book through statements and interviews, etc.

This doesn't show the US through rose-colored glasses. It definitely shows the people in power or authority in the US as greedy, manipulative, unethical, cruel and conniving sheisters... People who do not scruple to use and abuse and kill for more power and profit. And I don't doubt that's the case one bit.

True, this is one-sided with a left-leaning slant. But it doesn't claim to be otherwise, unlike a certain faux *cough* "news" organization. This is exactly what it claims to be - a people's history of events that shaped America throughout the 20th century. 'People' meaning the little guy, the one without the power or authority to make the rules or enforce them. This shows the perspective of those people who are affected by the people who do have the authority to make the rules and enforces them strictly.

Do I think that what is communicated here is 100% truth and nothing but? Hardly... This is a collection of impressions from people who were there, bound together by a man with a pretty clear agenda. But nevertheless, I found it interesting and pretty informative.

I would love to see the other side of these events, to see the thought-process behind some of the decisions and choices that the people in power made... but you know, the funny thing is that they are shockingly mum regarding that... It seems to me, at least from what I've seen in my lifetime, that what "they" tell us is a combination of spin and buzzwords and fear-mongering. I doubt truth enters into the equation very often, if at all. Does saying so make me a "bad American?" Probably to some. But I love my country... I'm just ashamed of its actions a lot of the time.

Anyway. I would have liked for this to be a little more in depth, even for just the highlighted segments that were included in the audio. I would have liked it to be a bit more clearly defined regarding the sections (Civil Rights, Women's Lib, Vietnam, Native American Rights, etc). Many of the sections bled into each other, or came around to address points again from a slightly different position, but I think that this muddied the waters a bit, and it could have had a bit more impact had it been better organized.

I also think that Matt Damon could have been a bit more... animated as a reader. I enjoy his voice, it was soothing and nice to listen to, but considering the subjects, and the fact that he's reading people's stories, I think that he could have brought them to life a bit more. Maybe he didn't want to step on their toes, so to speak? To disrespect these people who speak for themselves? I'm not sure... it just sounded dispassionate at times to me.

All in all, I really enjoyed this and I will be reading the full text at some point. I can't advertise for this to be included in school curriculum, but it is something I would recommend for anyone looking for a change in perspective. As with all things, take it with a grain of salt.

[Marie · Rating 3 out of 5]

It wasn't quite what I was expecting. The narrative relies on first-hand accounts, which is nice, and poetry, which was unexpected, and runs through general topics such as the anti-war movement, the civil rights movement, the prisoner's rights movement.

Felt jarring to me that my audiobook was narrated by Matt Damon. Like... "Hi, I'm Matt Damon, I am a young black woman..."

In hindsight that was right on the cover, but I'm used to my audiobooks being narrated by the author or someone I've never heard of, whose voice I can associate fully with the text. I couldn't associate his voice fully with the text. :P

I also hadn't realized this was put out in 2003, rather close to the end of the 20th Century and I felt myself feeling the disconnect between that time and today. Things look a little different from today's perspective.

I'm hoping to read the parent volume eventually, this came up on the library app first. I wish I hadn't already been familiar with most of the poems in this volume.
I felt the women's movement was given short shrift. I dunno... that bit just felt real short, and the most out-of-date. Might be my bias.

Lots of reasons to get angry in a slender volume.

[Becca · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'm a pretty left leaning person. I protested Geroge W's election and the post 9-11 wars, I grumbled early and often about military spending and social inequity. My sketchy understanding of the inner workings of 20th government policy and military history does me no credit.
But Zinn tells the story of the 20th century through the lens of resistance-- unions, war protests, strikes and movements that barely get a footnote but that provided the crucial pressure for progressice change in those 100 years.
This is the kind of book that challenges my assumptions, pushes me towards new questions, and inspires me to learn more. I squirmed as he described the failures and inadequacies of the Democratic party's compromises, and flinched to hear his predictions from 2000: such a huge portion of the population is disenfranchised and unrepresented, they will be susceptible to right wing strong man leadership OR open to real progressive change.
I wish I had read this before Bernie's campaign-- it would have put his work in context. As it is, I'm left curious, concerned, and eager to seek out deeper context and clearer understanding of the tides that brought us here and the options that lie before us.

[Jen · Rating 4 out of 5]

I tried to read the full version right after college and didn't make it very far. Decided to do the 20th century abridged version this time and made it thru the audio version this time (Matt Damon narrates.... swoon). It lived up to my expectations. Zinn presents historical events factually, from a perspective that is ignored in conventional "History". It's a humanist view that I very much appreciate. I really like his matter of fact writing style and also the plain toned way Matt Damon read it. The only part that I thought he was a little bit emotional about was the updated info that he reads about the Clinton administration. It seems to get a little bit disproportionate amount of attention, I assume because he was still living it when he wrote it. Not that the info was less chilling, but for me it lost something when the writing changed tone.

[Jacob Seely · Rating 4 out of 5]

This should not be the first book you read on American history, nor the second, nor probably even the third. But it is a book worth reading.

This is an admittedly biased history that attempts to counter the official "victor's" narrative with a narrative of the oppressed, and is best viewed as a corrective than the absolute truth. Zinn cherry-picks like mad and can be pretty credulous when it fits his skeptical counternarrative. (Take this quote: "Without the social benefits that they had received...unregulated market capitalism turned out to be disastrous for people in the former Soviet Union, who saw huge fortunes accumulated by a few, and deprivation for the masses.") His posture also makes him inconsistent (e.g. one moment he'll lambast interventionism and the next he'll bewail inaction).

To hear Zinn tell it, the history of the U.S. is oppression, everybody in jail is a victim, and only thing between us and world peace is political will. But then again, in some other tellings you get the sense that there's nothing to fix at all.

[Dolly · Rating 3 out of 5]

This audiobook, excellently narrated by Matt Damon, focuses solely on the Twentieth Century and features many of the civil rights struggles and instances where the underprivileged were abused or exploited by the powerful and rich.

If there's one theme running through this book (and likely the larger original volume, which covers U.S. History since 1492), it's that rich and powerful white men have dominated the political scene, the establishment and enforcement of laws, and written the history books since our country's founding.

The author admits that he has much personal bias, based on his background, and explains in the end, that other books are helpful in filling the gaps he has left wide open. I appreciate the nod to the narrator, where he talks about Mr. Damon's support for the custodial staff at Harvard who were petitioning for a higher wage in order to support their families and live reasonably close to work.

I was a bit shocked by the massive number of protests, many of which were violent, that focused on our Vietnam War effort.
]

interesting quotes:

In whose interest are we acting?

[Kile · Rating 5 out of 5]

The second half bigger book. Lots of good info. The people are expendable and the establishment will kill us to stay in power.

[Clarence Reed · Rating 3 out of 5]

ReedIII Quick Review: Selected US historical events told from an alternative point of view. Stories are limited to the late 20th century. Very interesting and thought provoking, especially for anyone living through these events.

[Cordelia Rutter · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really wish there were a full audiobook

[Chandler Jameson · Rating 2 out of 5]

Note: this review can apply to both the full-text print version of the book as well as the audiobook that only has sections from the mid to late 20th century.

Howard Zinn is certainly a talented writer and a well informed historian, arguably one of the most influential historians of the last century. Howard Zinn’s book is one of the most (if not the most) assigned book in High School and College classrooms. There are over 2,000,000 copies of the book in circulation (I won two myself) and if one googles “Most popular history books,” Zinn is only edged out by Jared Diamond. Besides this, Zinn’s book is well known in popular culture with references to it directly in “Good Will Hunting” and “The Sopranos.” Zinn’s History Channel special featured actors like Viggo Mortenson. How many books are narrated by Matt Damon?

This popularity, for me, is part of the problem: it is very likely that the only history book any given American has read is Zinn’s record of American history. Some reviews on Goodreads have even recommended that “if you only read one history book, read this one.”

As many have pointed out, Zinn often brings up facts and evidence that are ignored by many historians. For this, Zinn’s work is laudable and very valuable. Indeed, whenever I need to criticize the United States, I know that I will find something in Zinn. I will not quibble with the facts that Zinn presents. What I will argue against is his persistent left-wing interpretation of those facts.

In teachers’ education there is the idea of the “null-curriculum;” the curriculum is everything you teach and talk about, the “null-curriculum” is everything you DON’T teach. In many ways, what you don’t teach is just as or even more important than what you do teach.

In a similar way, one can tell a lot about an author by what they leave out.

Zinn acknowledges this at the end of his book when he observes that historians need to make choices about what they include and what they discard. The problem for Zinn is that in his 600+ pages, the only things that are brought up are those things that support his overarching worldview, I.e. the United States is terrible in every way.

This is the major problem with Zinn’s work and with its popularity: there is very little nuance and very little acknowledgement of opposing viewpoints. Further, because most people don’t read or study history casually, most will swallow wholesale Zinn’s interpretation. Some even claim that Zinn’s work is “the real history.” Sam Wineburg in an article for the American Federation of Teachers writes that many of Zinn’s claims “ultimately derives its power from a single source: the expected ignorance of the reader.”

The more one learns about other interpretations, the more one can see the rather underhanded way Zinn presents facts.

There are many examples that I could draw upon to show how Zinn doesn’t tell the whole story in order to support his worldview. The most galling example for me is his treatment of the Vietnam War. Zinn hits the expected notes: Gulf of Tonkin, Agent Orange, My Lai, the protest movement. But in his attempts to show the United States as a brutal imperial power, he leaves out key details about the Viet Cong and North Vietnam.

Zinn writes about the Vietnamese Communists in glowing terms. He leaves out any discussion of the atrocities committed by the NVA or by the Viet Cong. Violence and intimidation against anyone who supported the South or did not adequately support the communists. The Viet Cong death squads who murdered thousands following the failure of the Tet Offensive. There is no discussion of the totalitarian nature of Ho Chi Minh’s Vietnam, the torture and indoctrination and executions and censorship. There is a lot of discussion about the protests against the Diem Regime. But there is no discussion of the fact that at least South Vietnam ALLOWED protests. The North did not allow any such protest. There is no discussion of the terror that many in the south felt in 1975 as the communists rushed south, taking Saigon. There is no discussion of the Boat People, 2,000,000 Vietnamese who desperately fled their homeland in the wake of the communist takeover. There is no discussion of the nearly 3,000,000 people the Communists liquidated and murdered (at least 1,000,000 of which occurred after 1975).

There is no discussion of any of this because it does not support Zinn’s argument, therefore he is silent. Similarly, Zinn is continuously silent about the crimes of other Communist regimes. This connects directly to Zinn’s continuous moral equivalency, his endeavor to paint the United States as just as bad as the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany.

Furthermore, throughout his book Zinn engages in a number of blatant contradictions. Zinn is very pro-democracy; until the majority of Americans support the Gulf War. Zinn is very anti-nationalism; unless a nationalist group is opposing the United States. Zinn is anti-violence; unless he is praising the likes of the Black Panthers. Zinn is anti-government; unless it is engaging in massively expensive welfare schemes. The list goes on.

Furthermore, Zinn states that his book is critical and skeptical of states, of governments and “great men.” Fair enough, but throughout his book Zinn conflates the civil society with the government. He often criticizes aspects of American culture, corporations, and the free market as if they are one and the same with the government or government policy.

Furthermore, Zinn’s quasi-Marxist economic analyses are laughable at best. In one example, in order to demonstrate how African Americans were left out economically, Zinn compares the incomes of Mowtown Records and Exxon-Mobile, as if it proved anything. For one thing, the two industries are wildly different from one another. For another, Zinn is leaving out the key fact that most businesses fail. So while the black owned Motown Records was thriving, there were likely hundreds of other white owned businesses that failed.

Further, Zinn attempts to paint a picture of ever present and grinding poverty, an economy where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. But every statistical indicator contradicts this perception. Indeed, the average income of many European countries is at or below the poverty line in the US. The average American is far wealthier than any other person in the world and is only improving. All over the world, the lot of every day people is improving; all thanks to the economic system Zinn hates. Indeed, the economic system that Zinn prefers has only resulted in bankruptcy, poverty, tyranny, and death. But Zinn never discusses any of these things. For Zinn, his way is the only way.

I am not alone in these criticisms, even liberals have criticized Zinn’s work along these same grounds.

Zinn "renounces the ideals of objectivity and empirical responsibility, and makes the dubious leap to the notion that a historian need only lay his ideological cards on the table and tell whatever history he chooses," Greenberg writes in the liberal magazine “The New Republic.”


American Federation of Teachers: “It seems that once (Zinn) made up his mind, nothing—not new evidence, not new scholarship, not the discovery of previously unknown documents, not the revelations of historical actors on their deathbeds—could shake it," Wineburg wrote. He added that "history as truth, issued from the left or from the right, abhors shades of gray. It seeks to stamp out the democratic insight that people of good will can see the same thing and come to different conclusions same thing and come to different conclusions."

In the end, the book has a lot of valuable information that should not be overlooked. But if you read the book, please read at least one other history book as well.


https://www.aft.org/periodical/americ...


https://www.google.com/search?q=most+...


https://newrepublic.com/article/11257...


https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD...


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pover...

https://ourworldindata.org/extreme-po...

[Steve H · Rating 4 out of 5]

Zinn provides a history of many aspects of 20th century US from the point of view of ordinary people, oppressed people, the poor, the disenfranchised, and the losers rather than the traditional monolithic view that takes the perspective of the winners, the leaders, and the elites. In so doing we're given a view of history not found in most history texts. Zinn's history is for the most part not the usual, passive "a war was fought" or "conflicts occurred" view of the past. Instead he portrays actors, some noble, some with few or no morals, actively creating history.

Having said that, this work, perhaps because of its abridgement for audio, leaves out some details that would be useful in understanding historic events. When Zinn says that civil rights activists were arrested or jailed, it would be helpful to know why they were arrested or jailed. If somebody is attacked, what were the motives for attacks? Are the underdogs always blameless victims?

There are those who will not like Zinn's focus on illegal and immoral actions of government officials or his neutral or favorable assessments of people or forces once deemed radicals or traitors, but this part of our history needs to be read and understood lest we continue to suffer similar travesties.

[Jami · Rating 4 out of 5]

After watching a documentary about Howard Zinn, I realized I had never read A People's History Of The United States. Knowing the size of the book, I thought I'd do better by listening to it; however, the book itself is not available in audiobook form. Argh! Never fear. This is still a great audiobook. I learned so much about the Civil Rights movement, the Vietnam War, the Clinton administration and lots more. The only criticism I have is with Matt Damon's performance. It's amazing that an actor lacks the ability to speak in anything other than a monotone. Howard Zinn reads on the last cd and, after listening to him, I think Matt was trying to sound just like him. Although I have to say Zinn is better.
Regardless, this is a very important book. My hope is everyone does what Zinn did and look at issues from a different perspective. It is very eye opening.

[Heather · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book on CD only includes the 20th Century (the actual book is pretty thick) but it's got some great information. Focuses on Civil Rights movement to the present.

The saying, "the more things change, the more they stay the same" comes to mind. Politicians are replaying the same things from our history to this day. Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it.

The part on Prez Clinton was particularly enlightening. I cannot believe all the things I'd forgotten that he did - WELFARE REFORM, military bombings in Africa & Europe). It makes me wonder why I ever liked him (republicans, democrats, same difference).

I highly suggest this book! As a matter of fact, I might go buy it for my bookshelf as a reference book.

[Rachel Smalter Hall · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well. Howard Zinn was preaching to the choir, and I loved every second. This audio book is co-narrated by Matt Damon and Howard Zinn (who were neighbors in Boston when Damon was growing up), and both are great readers.

I got a little choked up when Zinn spoke about the women's lib movement in the 60s and 70s. It was this emotional, empowered reaction: "wow, he's a historian, and he's telling the history of my people!" I'm sure the rest of the "untold histories" that he finally tells in this book have a similar effect on other groups of underrepresented people, too.

Zinn cares not for war, power or money, but for people. He's extremely idealistic, but I believe that we need visionaries like Zinn to help us imagine what might be possible~

[Marcus · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read the 20th Century abridged version of A People's History, so I kinda cheated there. The 20th Century abridge version starts in the 60s, because apparently nothing of interest happened in the 1910s, 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, or 1950s. :| Still, it was interesting getting a more hands-on accounting of Civil Rights, women's equality, America's fascination with prisons, and the continued mistreatment of Native Americans. He covers a bit on Vietnam and Operation Desert Storm and finishes by railing on the Clinton Administration's ties to big business (while staying mostly silent on the Reagan and Bush I administrations). I can't say I learned anything earth-shattering, having come across most of these topics before elsewhere, but his presentation was at least readable and not too ponderous.

[Cindy Santos · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is just another overrated book by Howard Zinn. Most of the information is based on Zinn’s left-leaning views, which is totally acceptable. My issue is that he provides readers with a litany of complaints about the 20th century without taking into account their proper historical context. For example, he spent an inordinately amount of time bashing President Clinton for not being progressive enough. It is true that Clinton governed as a centrist, moderate and pragmatist, but that doesn’t mean that he didn’t have progressive views. It just means that there were other political forces that Clinton had to contend with.

[Msladydeborah · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think that it important to refresh memories of historical events during the course of one's lifetime. A People's History of the United States: Highlights from the Twentieth Century provided me with the opportunity to accomplish that goal.


I selected the audiobook, which contains seven discs. Matt Damon and Howard Zinn are the readers.

[Kerry · Rating 4 out of 5]

Looking forward to reading the entire book. While driving to and from work, I listened to Matt Damon and then Howard Zinn recap the 20th century. It reminded me of how much we learned about protest and demonstration from the 50's 60's and 70's.

[Hermine · Rating 4 out of 5]

Timely! Wish I could know what he would have written about this past year ...

[Patrick · Rating 3 out of 5]

First let me say that everyone should read this important book regardless of one's political leanings. Where you fall on the ideological spectrum will determine how much you agree or disagree with Zinn's ideas. Maybe you'll hear the evidence he presents and decide that your original viewpoint carries more weight; maybe your very concept of the United States will be rocked to its core. Regardless, A People's History will challenge you to think about America's place in the world and perhaps even your own long-held beliefs.

In lieu of reading the entire book, I opted for the audiobook, which presents highlights from the 20th century. Even this presents a daunting amount of information, and I'd like to synthesize some of my thoughts and criticisms in the bullets below:

* Zinn rails (rightly) against corporate-backed media interests, and he's mostly right about this where television media is concerned. However, he seems to lump all but independent and alternative journalists in this category, which is a mistake. Journalists working for the New York Times, the Washington Post, NPR, the Boston Globe, and many more do good work that holds the powerful accountable -- as evidenced by the fact that Zinn, ironically, leans on so many citations from these sources.

* Zinn, in my opinion, gives too much credit to Catholic religious groups while ignoring almost all others, including evangelical Christians. Sure, some Catholic priests and nuns participated in the counter-culture movements of the '60s and '70s, but the Catholic Church remains an overtly powerful conservative institution that opposes most of the progressive social reforms that Zinn supports, including the right to abortion (which Zinn frames as an economic issue), and the rights of the LGBT community. Meanwhile, evangelicals have grown to become a toxic political force -- something that Zinn completely ignores.

* Zinn seems not to care about the size of the national deficit or the ability to ever get it under control. Will more social programs balloon the debt? Zinn seems to say, "Who cares?" I don't understand enough about the issue to say whether this is a good or bad thing, apart from a vague idea that the nation should have some kind of debt in order to maintain its credit status but not enough as to be untenable. Just some nebulous thoughts on this one.

* While I would love to live in Zinn's socialist utopia in which military spending is down, spending for the arts is up, and everyone has a job, housing, food, and healthcare, I have to ask: Is such a dream realistic? Making this happen would require an enormous (and possibly even violent) revolution, and I'm not just talking about some Bernie Sanders-style rhetoric. The country would literally have to be destroyed and rebuilt from the ground up, and I'm not sure that kind of change is even possible.

[James Martin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the shorter, twentieth-century focused version of Zinn’s longer history of the same name, two copies of which have been staring down at me from the bookshelf for a number of years. I’ve made a few starts, but decided the shorter audiobook, read beautifully by Matt Damon and less beautifully but competently by Zinn himself, might be a good start. Or, at any rate, since it was in stock at the library, I went for it.

I’ve read some other things by Zinn, including his memoir. If you’re used to traditional histories, his approach will be new to you. He is interested in the history of protests and uprisings. His sympathies are with people and collective, local action. He is skeptical of the existence of anything as broad as a “national interest.” Or, perhaps, skeptical that what is presented as such ever really is. Zinn would be the first to admit that his histories are positioned in such a way. And he sees his work as a balance to the history we all learned in school, back when Columbus was celebrated for his navigation skills and what he and his followers did to indigenous populations was omitted or deemed unfortunate but inevitable.

This version, dealing with only selections from the twentieth century, mostly makes the case against war, encouraging us to spend our money on making the world a better place, rather than letting so much of our resources go to military and corporate interests. He spends a rather long time grinding his axe on Bill Clinton, which will either delight or annoy you depending upon how well you liked Clinton.

Zinn is worth reading. I find his work mostly depressing, but it’s an important part of a more inclusive discussion of what history really is. And it fills in many blank spaces in the parade of national conflicts that probably still fill too much of the history curricula, especially at the levels through high school. I got a good dose of the sort of complexity that Zinn encourages in college, though more though an Early American Literature class than through any of my history classes.

[Eric Pavao · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent history written from the point of view of the average citizens and the victims of governments rather than from the point of view of governments (as most historical accounts are written). The historical point of view is excellent and unique, his pointing out the problems and atrocities caused by governments and their war mongering are spot on. However his lack of economic understanding and his constant support of socialism comes through often. He goes back and forth between realizing that government is the problem and specifying the horrors caused by government action, to wanting the government to be larger, have more control, levy more taxes, and enforce stronger regulatory control over citizens. This book is a must read for the history, but leaves one disappointed with Zinn's proposed solutions and his lack of ability to fully see that government power is the root of the problem.

[Paige McLoughlin · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read Zinn's book in the 1980s before it became a staple of many school history curriculum. I have dipped into it every now and again since then. I think it is a great jumping-off point to acquire a left perspective on history. Nowadays it would probably be targetted as critical race theory or left indoctrination by right-wingers. At the first reading, it was a valuable corrective to the standard history I got in high school. I still think it is a useful work as a primer for history as viewed from the bottom up. The edition I read was updated in the early aughts to include material on the first gulf war of the 1990s. I wonder what Zinn would make of the US in the 2020s. I am sure he would not be surprised but probably a little disappointed.

[Kamarr Richée · Rating 4 out of 5]

I first read this book for AP US History more than 20 years ago. I put not he audiobook to enjoy with my family and educate my children on a foundational approach to history I was gifted with, but was disappointed to find this is not the original, entire text, but just a selection of some of the topics covered therein with a few updates. AS such, I opted to finish listening on my own. it is still a good book, with a great and open discussion on a different approach top recording and recounting history, but it is nowhere near as epic as the original.

[Tie Webb · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well, what can I say. This book is a real eye opener. Makes you think about history in a an entirely different way. What you hear in the media is what you are supposed to hear, not what is really happening. I listened to the audio book (truncated) that was read by Matt Damon and Howard Zinn. Especially liked Mr Zinn’s commentary at the end. Highly recommended. For fun check out this Zinnesque clip from Good Will Hunting. https://youtu.be/l8rQNdBmPek

[Christina · Rating 2 out of 5]

I think what was hard about this book was that it felt like I had constantly missed the first half of the story. He jumps right into the middle of the history, right into the thick of it. And I wished I had gotten more context for the things he was saying. This made it hard to follow and difficult to stay tuned in.