What do you think?
Rate this book
TWENTIETH CENTURY
From the author of A People's History of the United States . "Professor Zinn writes with an enthusiasm rarely encountered in the leaden prose of academic history."--Eric Foner, New York Times Book Review
368 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1984
157 people are currently reading
2579 people want to read
About the author
Howard Zinn
246 books2,848 followersHoward 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.
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.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 87 reviews
February 28, 2013
Yes, I read this book because of the reference to it in Good Will Hunting. And yes, it knocked me on my ass. How do you like dem apples?
February 14, 2012
Professor Zinn and I have vastly different political beliefs but I'm going to discuss his book and not his politics right up until the end. This is an abridgement of Zinn's A People's History of the United States that only covers the 20th Century. Apparently, according to Zinn, the 20th Century didn't begin until the 1960s and then everyone protested a lot of things. Zinn makes the point of describing the "people" from the title by saying 1% of Americans control 45% of the wealth, the "people" are the other 99%. Zinn then goes on the talk about civil rights protestors, anti-war protestors, prison protestors, Indian protestors, and on and on, so in reality, the "people" are the 1% of the population who protest. The other 98% are forgotten about, I assume because they have jobs and don't have time to protest. [return][return]Zinn also misuses data to make his points, for example, comparing incomes between two groups but only converting one into 2004 dollars. He also assumes meanings to events that are not really there. For instance, in discussing the 1992 election, he states that 19% of voters were unhappy with the choices given by the two major parties and protested against the choices they were given by voting for Ross Perot. As unlikely as it seems, I would be willing to bet the a fair number of people who voted for Perot did so because they wanted to vote for him and not as a protest against the other candidates. These are just a few examples of issues I had with this book. I say book, but it was actually an audio book, so I should probably say CDs. The reason I mention that is I said at the start that I was not going to discuss Zinn's politics until the end, which would be now. [return][return]While I agree with some of what Zinn said I still had a hard time finishing the book (CD) and actually I didn't finish it. I made it to the last CD when Zinn started talking about poor oppressed Mumia Abu-Jamal and how he was sentenced to death because the government wanted to shut him up, no mention of the crime he committed or of the cop he killed. At that point I hit the eject button and if the CDs hadn't belonged to the library, I would have chucked them out the window onto 95. Damn Communist Bastard.
March 4, 2008
Again, this was another book that changed my views of the world. Its the history of our bad deeds of the US and its people. But understanding that going in, it'll show you the silent side of our history without making you hate our country. Very dense, but still a must read.
April 29, 2014
What complete garbage!
Here is a quick synopsis:
While the North Vietnamese and Việt Cộng were altruistic and wanted nothing but rainbows and butterflies, Americans are bad evil ogres (but only if they are white, male, Christian and heterosexual) who brutally kill any time they can so they can get rice and oil a little cheaper.
Jimmy Carter was one of our best presidents; Reagan one of the worst. Wealth=wickedness; poverty=virtue. All white people are racist, all males are sexist, Christians are intolerant and heterosexuals are homophobic. Non-white people cannot be racist; they are oppressed. Marriage and family is a tool of subversion and oppression; NOT a means for raising children in a happy healthy environment, nor as a source of happiness and joy.
Communism is the perfect system for sunshine and lollipops with everybody as smiling, happy hippies. The Soviet Union just did it wrong (and China, North Korea, Cuba don't exist - neither did Mao, Lenin, the Kim family or Castro).
--
Mentioning several isolated incidents is a lousy way to look at the big picture. Yes, there are examples of bigotry, violence and poverty in the United States. However, most people here welcome diversity and the poor of no other country are as well off as those in the USA. I would rather be the poorest American where there is a massive wealth inequality than be wealthy in North Korea where there is very little wealth inequality. Under communism, everyone is equally poor; in America, everyone has the opportunities necessary to become part of the super-rich. Most of our wealthiest people started from relatively humble backgrounds and became rich with brilliant ideas that improve the lives of countless people.
Communism as a great system? No thanks, I will take my chances under capitalism.
Here is a quick synopsis:
While the North Vietnamese and Việt Cộng were altruistic and wanted nothing but rainbows and butterflies, Americans are bad evil ogres (but only if they are white, male, Christian and heterosexual) who brutally kill any time they can so they can get rice and oil a little cheaper.
Jimmy Carter was one of our best presidents; Reagan one of the worst. Wealth=wickedness; poverty=virtue. All white people are racist, all males are sexist, Christians are intolerant and heterosexuals are homophobic. Non-white people cannot be racist; they are oppressed. Marriage and family is a tool of subversion and oppression; NOT a means for raising children in a happy healthy environment, nor as a source of happiness and joy.
Communism is the perfect system for sunshine and lollipops with everybody as smiling, happy hippies. The Soviet Union just did it wrong (and China, North Korea, Cuba don't exist - neither did Mao, Lenin, the Kim family or Castro).
--
Mentioning several isolated incidents is a lousy way to look at the big picture. Yes, there are examples of bigotry, violence and poverty in the United States. However, most people here welcome diversity and the poor of no other country are as well off as those in the USA. I would rather be the poorest American where there is a massive wealth inequality than be wealthy in North Korea where there is very little wealth inequality. Under communism, everyone is equally poor; in America, everyone has the opportunities necessary to become part of the super-rich. Most of our wealthiest people started from relatively humble backgrounds and became rich with brilliant ideas that improve the lives of countless people.
Communism as a great system? No thanks, I will take my chances under capitalism.
April 10, 2021
There’s a sweeping galvanization; a wave of pathos that I feel in Zinn’s writing. While the work itself reads more as a treatise with tremendous and questionable bent, I give it 5 stars first for the sheer breadth of coverage and secondly for a wonderful bibliography of source texts from the underrepresented, ignored, and downtrodden of this nation.
Most of the critiques and controversy lobbed at Zinn, from what I have seen, attack his very skewed retelling of events. Zinn himself acknowledges this, and responds with something I very much agree with: that objectivity is a ruse. All facts that are brought before you are the facts (and the commentary from those facts) based on what the presenter felt was important and worthy of your time. Other facts, and other perspectives on those facts, inevitably are left at the wayside. This isn’t because everyone is out to deceive you; it would simply take too long to have every person map out every perspective and every fact of a period and then write a cogent history through that. When people write history, they have implicit and explicit bias as to who they are choosing to read from, what sources they have available to them or know about, etc. Howard Zinn states very clearly that all he is trying to do is even the scales; with textbook upon textbook and thesis upon thesis based in the same perspective of the victors, the generals, the leaders and the businessmen, it can begin to feel like there aren’t any other perspectives. This book is intended to be their dark mirror; to leave out what they include and include what they leave out. Perhaps if we can find a way to hold all of these things in a creative tension we will be better able to forge a path ahead for all of us.
Most of the critiques and controversy lobbed at Zinn, from what I have seen, attack his very skewed retelling of events. Zinn himself acknowledges this, and responds with something I very much agree with: that objectivity is a ruse. All facts that are brought before you are the facts (and the commentary from those facts) based on what the presenter felt was important and worthy of your time. Other facts, and other perspectives on those facts, inevitably are left at the wayside. This isn’t because everyone is out to deceive you; it would simply take too long to have every person map out every perspective and every fact of a period and then write a cogent history through that. When people write history, they have implicit and explicit bias as to who they are choosing to read from, what sources they have available to them or know about, etc. Howard Zinn states very clearly that all he is trying to do is even the scales; with textbook upon textbook and thesis upon thesis based in the same perspective of the victors, the generals, the leaders and the businessmen, it can begin to feel like there aren’t any other perspectives. This book is intended to be their dark mirror; to leave out what they include and include what they leave out. Perhaps if we can find a way to hold all of these things in a creative tension we will be better able to forge a path ahead for all of us.
December 20, 2013
Garbage.
December 4, 2025
It's crappy.
I did the audio version. Never got into it and finally quit on it after completing 5 of the 7 discs. My son wisely bailed after two CDs. A neighbor started reading this book on paper and quickly quit.
I like the overall idea. Let's get out and look at how native americans, blacks and women were discriminated against, and how government policies were involved. But it's not done in a good way. It's not compelling or memorable. Not enough new ground is broken, and it comes across as too slanted.
Briefly he gets into indian fishing rights in the State of Washington. I live in this area, so that's an issue I am familiar with. Zinn's version is lacking, slanted and incomplete (leaving out any mention of the Boldt decision, where the tribes ultimately prevailed).
Too much of this book is spent at the micro level, explaining how 35 kids at a small college wore black arm bands or a dozen high school kids in Nebraska brought raw meat to school. Those little incidents aren't significant in the grand scheme of things.
Most annoying were the milk-and-cookies sections, where Zinn argues that the prisoners of Attica were on the verge of creating some kind of interracial utopia if only the prison guards hadn't gotten involved. And he argues that the communists in Vietnam were really swell guys -- really looking out for the people of the region -- if only the U.S. hadn't gotten involved. World isn't black and white; it's gray.
I did the audio version. Never got into it and finally quit on it after completing 5 of the 7 discs. My son wisely bailed after two CDs. A neighbor started reading this book on paper and quickly quit.
I like the overall idea. Let's get out and look at how native americans, blacks and women were discriminated against, and how government policies were involved. But it's not done in a good way. It's not compelling or memorable. Not enough new ground is broken, and it comes across as too slanted.
Briefly he gets into indian fishing rights in the State of Washington. I live in this area, so that's an issue I am familiar with. Zinn's version is lacking, slanted and incomplete (leaving out any mention of the Boldt decision, where the tribes ultimately prevailed).
Too much of this book is spent at the micro level, explaining how 35 kids at a small college wore black arm bands or a dozen high school kids in Nebraska brought raw meat to school. Those little incidents aren't significant in the grand scheme of things.
Most annoying were the milk-and-cookies sections, where Zinn argues that the prisoners of Attica were on the verge of creating some kind of interracial utopia if only the prison guards hadn't gotten involved. And he argues that the communists in Vietnam were really swell guys -- really looking out for the people of the region -- if only the U.S. hadn't gotten involved. World isn't black and white; it's gray.
July 18, 2013
This book was incredibly biased, without identifying itself as so. The author, at one point, refers to Bill O'Reilly as "as popular TV personality", and implied that his statements reflected the mood of the entire country.
There were some interesting points, but the author ignores so many contributing factors that it's almost impossible to read. When talking about prisoner's rights, for instance, he only talks about protesters that are arrested, he doesn't acknowledge the fact that a lot of the people in prison are dangerous people, and have their rights restricted because they've done atrocious things.
There were some interesting points, but the author ignores so many contributing factors that it's almost impossible to read. When talking about prisoner's rights, for instance, he only talks about protesters that are arrested, he doesn't acknowledge the fact that a lot of the people in prison are dangerous people, and have their rights restricted because they've done atrocious things.
June 25, 2014
Required reading to have any intelligent conversation about the country.
March 3, 2018
Such an important rewriting of American history through the people's movements and early socialist thinking. Should be required reading
August 31, 2015
Being excerpted from a larger work necessarily means that this review is inherently not the most fair, however I believe "it was ok" is an accurate statement for this work. It is also the case that the American political climate has changed rapidly in the past decade (as it is wont to do), so this book is no longer as up-to-date in its projections or as accurate in its big-picture analyses.
While Zinn makes some progress in drawing attention to the history of people who are usually categorically ignored in our public education history classes (e.g., the American inconsistency to condemn other countries' acts against their peoples while ignoring the poor living conditions that Native American reservations experience), other works, like Loewen's Lies My Teacher Told Me accomplish the same in fewer pages.
Some of Zinn's arguments are unfair, though I shy away from what some other conservative reviewers below have called "tripe." Zinn does not claim that the oppressed are virtuous and that those in power are inherently evil, though he does point out that some relationships (crime with poverty, terrorism with war, etc.) could be more acutely addressed through the U.S. becoming a humanitarian superpower rather than a militaristic one -- an argument that some on the conservative side of the spectrum mislabel as communism. These arguments, though perhaps overly optimistic, are not poorly constructed. The unfair arguments rather come from omitting the opposing side.
For instance, Zinn argues in this excerpt that voter apathy is primarily the result of the U.S.'s two-party system wherein a majority of the population does not believe that any candidate actually represents them. However, he fails to address that when the U.S. had a viable third-party candidate in Ross Perot that the turnout was still low (55% in 1992, 49% in 1996).
While Zinn passed away in 2010, he openly told reporters that he would vote for Obama in 2008. I am curious as to how he would respond to some of the progressive policies that have come to fruition under Obama's administration, though I suspect that he would most likely (and with some overzealous fervor) that Obama was ultimately a failure. I got the impression here that Zinn moves the goal posts often in determining what 'progress' and 'success' mean.
In short, if you want an optimistic take on what America could be and a brutal look at some of the unfair things we have done to our own citizens and others around the world, I'd suggest reading the entire book instead of just the excerpt. It's only fair. And while you may need to recognize that Zinn puts forth some biased interpretations (which you should really be doing with any historian), I'd argue that most observations are more true that the "undeniable string of progress" that American history is presented as traditionally. If, however, you believe America does not need to apologize for anything at all, it may be best to avoid Zinn altogether and read a less contentious historian.
While Zinn makes some progress in drawing attention to the history of people who are usually categorically ignored in our public education history classes (e.g., the American inconsistency to condemn other countries' acts against their peoples while ignoring the poor living conditions that Native American reservations experience), other works, like Loewen's Lies My Teacher Told Me accomplish the same in fewer pages.
Some of Zinn's arguments are unfair, though I shy away from what some other conservative reviewers below have called "tripe." Zinn does not claim that the oppressed are virtuous and that those in power are inherently evil, though he does point out that some relationships (crime with poverty, terrorism with war, etc.) could be more acutely addressed through the U.S. becoming a humanitarian superpower rather than a militaristic one -- an argument that some on the conservative side of the spectrum mislabel as communism. These arguments, though perhaps overly optimistic, are not poorly constructed. The unfair arguments rather come from omitting the opposing side.
For instance, Zinn argues in this excerpt that voter apathy is primarily the result of the U.S.'s two-party system wherein a majority of the population does not believe that any candidate actually represents them. However, he fails to address that when the U.S. had a viable third-party candidate in Ross Perot that the turnout was still low (55% in 1992, 49% in 1996).
While Zinn passed away in 2010, he openly told reporters that he would vote for Obama in 2008. I am curious as to how he would respond to some of the progressive policies that have come to fruition under Obama's administration, though I suspect that he would most likely (and with some overzealous fervor) that Obama was ultimately a failure. I got the impression here that Zinn moves the goal posts often in determining what 'progress' and 'success' mean.
In short, if you want an optimistic take on what America could be and a brutal look at some of the unfair things we have done to our own citizens and others around the world, I'd suggest reading the entire book instead of just the excerpt. It's only fair. And while you may need to recognize that Zinn puts forth some biased interpretations (which you should really be doing with any historian), I'd argue that most observations are more true that the "undeniable string of progress" that American history is presented as traditionally. If, however, you believe America does not need to apologize for anything at all, it may be best to avoid Zinn altogether and read a less contentious historian.
September 25, 2012
I have read many books concerning the development of new political ideologies during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. I know that the Industrial Revolution culminated from advances in transportation, which improved trade by allowing for the quicker distribution of manufactured products and the growth of cities; advances in technology, Eli Whitney's interchangeable parts and Ransom Olds's asembly line revolutionized industry; discovery of new sources of energy such as coal and oil to power the growing markets and factories. I also know that cultural changes swept through the Industrial Revolution: former barons and landlords became capitalist factory owners; workers migrated form their farms to the cities in search of employment; civil unions and socialism growthed their ill will as the incomes of the upper class multiplied while those of labor workers rose just by a few percentages. I know how these changes led to social, cultural, eocnomic transformations in both the United States and abroad. I understand why Howard Zinn wrote this book and how he would answer some of the questions which I have formulated in my brain after reading this work of twentieth century analysis.
I gave this book three stars because I find most of the information to be redundant. Without even needing to research the author, I knew that he was a socialist, not that I frown on such an philosophy which is seen as a less extreme system of communism. The author supports minority groups which fight for their right to the pursuit of happiness, economic stabilility, and govenrment protection. But, I have grown pas t the point in which I blame society for my troubles. It is true that I did not attend the best schools in my neighborhood and that I did not receive equal levels of enocuragement as children born to more successful parents. But look at where I am now! Success does not arise from challenging unfair social conditions, for me, it has always been about utilizing my resources effectively and directing my potential and interests to favorable endeavors. It would be bigotry for me to lower my rating of Zinn's Twentiweth Century because our contrasting beliefs, but I will not change our apraisal of his work.
I gave this book three stars because I find most of the information to be redundant. Without even needing to research the author, I knew that he was a socialist, not that I frown on such an philosophy which is seen as a less extreme system of communism. The author supports minority groups which fight for their right to the pursuit of happiness, economic stabilility, and govenrment protection. But, I have grown pas t the point in which I blame society for my troubles. It is true that I did not attend the best schools in my neighborhood and that I did not receive equal levels of enocuragement as children born to more successful parents. But look at where I am now! Success does not arise from challenging unfair social conditions, for me, it has always been about utilizing my resources effectively and directing my potential and interests to favorable endeavors. It would be bigotry for me to lower my rating of Zinn's Twentiweth Century because our contrasting beliefs, but I will not change our apraisal of his work.
January 27, 2015
I listened to this as a trial run to see if I would want to read the entire People's History of the United States, and now I can safely say I do not. It's not that I don't agree with the content, it's just that it's not as revolutionary and groundbreaking as I was led to believe. I didn't feel like I was reading an alternate textbook, it just felt like i was reading an ordinary textbook. I know about Malcom X and Cesar Chavez...is this supposed to be new to me? Two decades ago I bet this was a big deal, but all this is out in the open at this point in time. I was at least expecting to find out some behind the scenes scandal we didn't hear about in the chapters on the new stuff about the Clinton and Bush presidencies, but nothing new there. We are all aware that Gore got the majority of the popular vote and Bush still became president. Disappointing...
September 22, 2011
This is a nice treatment of all the history you don't learn in textbooks - from the perspective of the minority groups that caused the change or were affected by it. I knew most of the information about the Black Rights movement and Native American struggles because I've read books about them and visited associated historic sites, but the rest was quite new to me. American suffragettes, gays/lesbians, war objectors, and prisoners are just some of the groups that should be covered better in school, but who's stories are really only found in detail here.
The audio version of this book is read by Matt Damon. His is the perfect voice for an intelligent, thought-provoking few hours of politics and drama.
The audio version of this book is read by Matt Damon. His is the perfect voice for an intelligent, thought-provoking few hours of politics and drama.
February 13, 2009
This man is my hero, and opened up my eyes to the idea of balanced history. You have to accept the bad and shameful parts of our past if you really want to say that you love this country. That's something I still struggle with, but reading Zinn never fails to remind me of all the strides we've made, and how it was the small and seemingly insignificant people that brought about those changes.
February 18, 2020
My second reading was as powerful as the first. There is page after page of history not taught, probably not even approved to be taught in our schools and way too much to include here. What bothers me the most is that it's somehow subversive or un-American to learn our history from all points of view.
May 27, 2018
I found this book fascinating, particularly America’s brush with socialism, the differences in the ways conservatives and progressives handled the threat, and the seeming current growth of conditions that may cause a repeat of history. I never learned any of this in school, sad to say.
August 22, 2018
In the classic (read: indecipherable) Jaclyn rating scale, I learned a ton and found his writing, for the most part, compelling. It also made me really, really mad, so that'll usually get you a 5. I'll probably go back and read the full People's History having now read this excerpt.
January 8, 2025
I've read bits and pieces of Zinn's book only in the last few years. Why wasn't he included in my history courses?
Read
November 7, 2014I actually didn't finish it...
May 27, 2018
one of the most important books ive read. american history is just greed - imperialism and capitalism, driven by simple and poisonous greed. i love the call to action in the 3rd to last chapter
May 8, 2023
This book was a fun read. I appreciated that Zinn openly admitted that he was writing with bias. My main critique would be his using "history" in his title. While he accurately states that no historian is without bias, he uses that as a foothold to make no attempt at objectivity whatsoever. He claims that there is no such thing as a uninterpreted fact because all facts are, at least, selected. In my opinion, this is patently false. Historians may disagree, for example, whether Christopher Columbus was a hero or villain, but the premise that Columbus crossed the Atlantic in 1492 is an uninterpreted fact. Likewise, Historians might disagree about many points of the Vietnam war but the fact that there was a Vietnam war is an uninterpreted fact. Only the wildest ravings of postmodernism could deny this.
The reality is that, working with some facts and some interpretations, Zinn has written a propaganda piece for socialism. In doing so, he has no clear basis for what he deems good or bad other than that socialists (especially himself) say so. For instance, when there was little popular support for the Vietnam war, he uses popular support to invalidate the war. When there was incredible popular support for the war on terror, he ignores his earlier methodology and easily concludes that the people were wrong. These kinds of shifts in methodology are so subtly woven in that one has to be paying close attention to see them. Reading carefully, one sees that Zinn's personal viewpoints are his criteria for truth, and thus the legitimacy of validation methods are ultimately whether they support his conclusion.
His greatest villain in the narrative is, of course, capitalism. People were never racist because they were evil, it was capitalism. Men never oppressed women because they were rotten, it was capitalism. The nuclear arms race had nothing to do with the militant imperialism of the USSR, no, it was capitalism. People do not commit crimes of violence or robbery because of greed, lack of respect for their neighbor, or anything whatsoever wrong in themselves, no, capitalism makes them do it.
Reading Zinn's history of the twentieth century, one would think that the only events of any real importance were the civil rights movement, the Vietnam war, the feminist movement, the sexual revolution, the gulf war, the war on drugs and the war on terror. The cold war, he seems to think, was significant only to the degree that the United States had a lot on nuclear weapons. This had nothing to do with anything going on in the USSR or the rest of the globe, except for his commentary that the USSR, People's Republic of China, etc., were "not real socialism."
He praises the movements he likes with no critical evaluation of any possible negative effects of any of them.
To critique everything false or silly in Zinn's book would require a book of my own, but the book does have many positive points. I gave it a three-star review (rather than less) because it does have many positive points.
1. Entertainment value. On the one hand, Zinn's zingy rhetoric is fun to read, and on the other, his claim to be a historian makes his approach quite comical.
2. I very much appreciate his honesty that he is writing with bias.
3. He does provide much real history and legitimate critiques of things that really do need to be criticized. The US government has done, and continues to do, many dubious things. Military action has often been based on lies, arms have been supplied to dubious governments, etc. These things must be called, as must many of the other concerns Zinn highlights: Injustice in the prison system, the dominance of the two-party system, etc.
4. Zinn has been a highly influential historian. If one wants to understand why so many in the younger generations think the way they do about American history, this book provides great insight. If we want to communicate well with disciples of Zinn and "historians" like him, we must read their work and critically evaluate it, for many will read it with the sole purpose of swallowing it whole.
The reality is that, working with some facts and some interpretations, Zinn has written a propaganda piece for socialism. In doing so, he has no clear basis for what he deems good or bad other than that socialists (especially himself) say so. For instance, when there was little popular support for the Vietnam war, he uses popular support to invalidate the war. When there was incredible popular support for the war on terror, he ignores his earlier methodology and easily concludes that the people were wrong. These kinds of shifts in methodology are so subtly woven in that one has to be paying close attention to see them. Reading carefully, one sees that Zinn's personal viewpoints are his criteria for truth, and thus the legitimacy of validation methods are ultimately whether they support his conclusion.
His greatest villain in the narrative is, of course, capitalism. People were never racist because they were evil, it was capitalism. Men never oppressed women because they were rotten, it was capitalism. The nuclear arms race had nothing to do with the militant imperialism of the USSR, no, it was capitalism. People do not commit crimes of violence or robbery because of greed, lack of respect for their neighbor, or anything whatsoever wrong in themselves, no, capitalism makes them do it.
Reading Zinn's history of the twentieth century, one would think that the only events of any real importance were the civil rights movement, the Vietnam war, the feminist movement, the sexual revolution, the gulf war, the war on drugs and the war on terror. The cold war, he seems to think, was significant only to the degree that the United States had a lot on nuclear weapons. This had nothing to do with anything going on in the USSR or the rest of the globe, except for his commentary that the USSR, People's Republic of China, etc., were "not real socialism."
He praises the movements he likes with no critical evaluation of any possible negative effects of any of them.
To critique everything false or silly in Zinn's book would require a book of my own, but the book does have many positive points. I gave it a three-star review (rather than less) because it does have many positive points.
1. Entertainment value. On the one hand, Zinn's zingy rhetoric is fun to read, and on the other, his claim to be a historian makes his approach quite comical.
2. I very much appreciate his honesty that he is writing with bias.
3. He does provide much real history and legitimate critiques of things that really do need to be criticized. The US government has done, and continues to do, many dubious things. Military action has often been based on lies, arms have been supplied to dubious governments, etc. These things must be called, as must many of the other concerns Zinn highlights: Injustice in the prison system, the dominance of the two-party system, etc.
4. Zinn has been a highly influential historian. If one wants to understand why so many in the younger generations think the way they do about American history, this book provides great insight. If we want to communicate well with disciples of Zinn and "historians" like him, we must read their work and critically evaluate it, for many will read it with the sole purpose of swallowing it whole.
July 22, 2024
History as taught in American schools is sanitized and concentrates on those who reach the top or near the top of power. Real history involves everyone and the movements that can succeed or fail to change the course of power either by replacing it or modifying it.
Howard Zinn set himself the task of informing readers of the many events and groups of people that standard histories overlook. This is beneficial in showing how the little people can organize to make a difference and how organization begins with someone believing change is possible.
This book is an excerpt of Zinn's longer work, A People's History of the United States. The account is moving and at the same time sobering. Advances have been made in the status of non-white Americans and of women. We should be proud of the end of slavery in America and the attempts at restraining the power of wealth.
What sobers this reader is the knowledge that much of the progressive changes have been either blunted or rolled back. Unions are a shadow of what they once were. Wealth is more powerful than it has ever been as the 1% depart to an ever greater degree from the 99%. The ultra rich waste billions of dollars on the hope of profit from the wealthy eager for space tourism. Liberty and justice for all is so far gone that ethnic cleansing Israeli Prime Minister is invited to speak to Congress even as he is conducting a slaughter in Gaza made fully possible by President Biden supplying all the ammunition to kill and destroy without restraint.
The power of Israel in the United States illustrates how wealthy individuals, the mega-donors, can corrupt Congress via campaign contributions that the Supreme Court has opened wide to businesses as well. The 2nd Amendment is interpreted to allow unlimited gun sales to individuals for the sake of huge profits to the gun makers. The Supreme Court has recently allowed the sale of bump stocks that turn semi-automatic rifles into machine guns, devastatingly demonstrated in the slaughter conducted in Las Vegas by one man.
Reviewing the civil rights struggle, the reader is astonished that the Supreme Court we see today could ever have been leading the way by interpreting the Constitution in line with the needs of the all but forgotten African Americans.
The United States, admired and respected by the world at the end of WW2, has now retreated into isolation with tiny Israel as the world looks on astonished at how low America has dropped and with no reversal of course in sight. Business lobbies have their way in preventing national healthcare and a carbon tax so desperately needed is not employed as American drivers boost rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere ever higher. Nothing is more needed than the elimination of private money from election campaigns as this is the lever of lobby power, yet all lobbies will unite to prevent a change to our democracy of lobbies.
As a person born in 1950, the nation's future in my youth always looked positive. Even the disaster of the Vietnam War offered hope for change, but so many pointless wars since show the change has not come. With no threat to national security, the "defense" budget is almost $1 trillion for one year.
This book made me sad as it is hard to see the regression underway being stopped. Huge problems face us, global warming being first among them, and the US is doing nothing substantial to address it or the other troubles of we the people.
I could say of this book, read it and weep.
Howard Zinn set himself the task of informing readers of the many events and groups of people that standard histories overlook. This is beneficial in showing how the little people can organize to make a difference and how organization begins with someone believing change is possible.
This book is an excerpt of Zinn's longer work, A People's History of the United States. The account is moving and at the same time sobering. Advances have been made in the status of non-white Americans and of women. We should be proud of the end of slavery in America and the attempts at restraining the power of wealth.
What sobers this reader is the knowledge that much of the progressive changes have been either blunted or rolled back. Unions are a shadow of what they once were. Wealth is more powerful than it has ever been as the 1% depart to an ever greater degree from the 99%. The ultra rich waste billions of dollars on the hope of profit from the wealthy eager for space tourism. Liberty and justice for all is so far gone that ethnic cleansing Israeli Prime Minister is invited to speak to Congress even as he is conducting a slaughter in Gaza made fully possible by President Biden supplying all the ammunition to kill and destroy without restraint.
The power of Israel in the United States illustrates how wealthy individuals, the mega-donors, can corrupt Congress via campaign contributions that the Supreme Court has opened wide to businesses as well. The 2nd Amendment is interpreted to allow unlimited gun sales to individuals for the sake of huge profits to the gun makers. The Supreme Court has recently allowed the sale of bump stocks that turn semi-automatic rifles into machine guns, devastatingly demonstrated in the slaughter conducted in Las Vegas by one man.
Reviewing the civil rights struggle, the reader is astonished that the Supreme Court we see today could ever have been leading the way by interpreting the Constitution in line with the needs of the all but forgotten African Americans.
The United States, admired and respected by the world at the end of WW2, has now retreated into isolation with tiny Israel as the world looks on astonished at how low America has dropped and with no reversal of course in sight. Business lobbies have their way in preventing national healthcare and a carbon tax so desperately needed is not employed as American drivers boost rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere ever higher. Nothing is more needed than the elimination of private money from election campaigns as this is the lever of lobby power, yet all lobbies will unite to prevent a change to our democracy of lobbies.
As a person born in 1950, the nation's future in my youth always looked positive. Even the disaster of the Vietnam War offered hope for change, but so many pointless wars since show the change has not come. With no threat to national security, the "defense" budget is almost $1 trillion for one year.
This book made me sad as it is hard to see the regression underway being stopped. Huge problems face us, global warming being first among them, and the US is doing nothing substantial to address it or the other troubles of we the people.
I could say of this book, read it and weep.
July 11, 2024
I loved this book. I wanted to give it five stars. Then I looked up the author's background.
Most of 20th century history taught in schools does not focus on the experience of women and minorities. Zinn masterfully converts first-hand accounts, primary sources, and testimonies from marginalized groups to support his argument that government never has served their interests. Nevertheless, he contends that these groups are at the foundation of America's "success."
Most insightful to me were his critiques of the so-called "Progressive Era" in politics, general progressive reforms, FDR, Theodore Roosevelt, Kennedy, and Clinton. These figures and movements, which I had previously associated with progressivism and some championing on the part of minorities, were now cast as members or movements of the status quo establishment, granting some concessions to stave off large scale reform.
Ultimately, though, this book does not get five stars because the author fails to disclose their Marxist allegiance which undermines its objectivity. Zinn's slant is evident throughout each chapter. A transparent preface would remedy this.
Most of 20th century history taught in schools does not focus on the experience of women and minorities. Zinn masterfully converts first-hand accounts, primary sources, and testimonies from marginalized groups to support his argument that government never has served their interests. Nevertheless, he contends that these groups are at the foundation of America's "success."
Most insightful to me were his critiques of the so-called "Progressive Era" in politics, general progressive reforms, FDR, Theodore Roosevelt, Kennedy, and Clinton. These figures and movements, which I had previously associated with progressivism and some championing on the part of minorities, were now cast as members or movements of the status quo establishment, granting some concessions to stave off large scale reform.
Ultimately, though, this book does not get five stars because the author fails to disclose their Marxist allegiance which undermines its objectivity. Zinn's slant is evident throughout each chapter. A transparent preface would remedy this.
November 23, 2018
This took me over 2 months to finish. It's not a hugely long book, but it covers so much territory that it was hard to read and digest more than 8 or 10 pages at a time. Zinn is unabashedly biased and spins a socialist take on the historical events of the 20th century. I didn't buy into all his opinions and spin on events, but it did make me think a lot about how, no matter who is in power, the working person is basically shafted. Zinn has a background in civil rights and protest, and his writing is best when he covers those topics. I think he did a great job with racial civil rights, including the Native American rights movement, and he did a decent job with prison reform and feminism. I thought it was odd that he didn't do GLBT rights as well- he did mention them, but it was very much in passing compared to the sections on women's rights and Jim Crow, etc. I like to read things occasionally that are challenging to my mindset and current beliefs, and I appreciated the book very much for that reason.
April 28, 2025
This is a must-read for anyone interested in American political history of the 20th century. The book is admittedly biased—but Zinn is open about that, explaining that his aim is to illuminate the darker, often overlooked sides of history. It’s not intended to make readers hate their country, but rather to get a more balanced and critical understanding of how politics operate and how history is frequently reshaped by those in power. Zinn reminds us that objectivity in history is often an illusion, crafted by dominant ideologies to maintain a certain narrative. Behind the rhetoric of freedom and equality, he argues, lies a system largely driven by the interests of those with wealth and access.
November 14, 2020
4.5 stars. I rented the audiobook from the library... it was mis-labeled "A People's History of the United States" so I was a little disappointed that I got this book instead, but that's not the author's fault. Definitely has a leftist bend, for instance the author feels RBG wasn't a strong liberal voice on the SC and was instead centrist, but it is a good counterpoint to Eurocentric American History being taught in schools. Zinn's voice most closely matches Bernie Sanders, Noam Chomsky, and Robert Reich. Calling this "The Twentieth Century" is a bit of a stretch, since no history is studied before 1950.
October 13, 2025
An easy-to-digest and meticulously-sourced outline of exactly why American society is broken: namely, the unwillingness of the government (irrespective of party) to take care of the basic human needs of its people, and the fervor with which it instead takes care of the needs of superwealthy individuals and multi-billion dollar corporations at every turn... EXCEPT at certain, rare points in history, when peoples' movements have realized their own leverage, organized, and risen up to demand change.
Essential stuff, and--in spite of defeat after defeat of causes for humanity and justice in the previous century--filled with hope for a better future.
Essential stuff, and--in spite of defeat after defeat of causes for humanity and justice in the previous century--filled with hope for a better future.
August 11, 2019
In a nutshell, the twenties century was really the idea that 'there has always been the oppression of the state on the people(s) both within and outside the country but the people persisted' was repeating itself many times. I am not sure if I agree entirely with the optimism, albeit cautious, that it's getting better and the people will eventually prevail. At least in the current context. I'd love to see what Dr. Zinn would've commented on the democratic backsliding unfolding around the world, had he been still with us. RIP.
September 22, 2020
I read this book in college. BOY OH BOY its a hard one but its the best on the market. What I mean is the book is dry and dense and hard to get through but when segmented reading is provided throughout it by an instructor the quick recap and info provided on the topics and history are reverent and assistive.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 87 reviews