An Analysis Of Howard Zinn 's Chapter Four Of A History Of The United States

Howard Zinn defines American exceptionalism as the belief “...that the United States alone has the right, whether it be divine sanction or moral obligation, to bring civilization, or democracy, or liberty to the rest of the world, by violence if necessary.” The American exceptionalist ideology has domestic implications found in political rhetoric and within the founding of the United States. External implications of exceptionalism are evident in American foreign policy and militaristic interventions such as Vietnam and Iraq. A new definition of has arisen, highlighting the negative implications of exceptionalism, “Roast beef and apple pie explained exceptionalism but now we are back to moldy rye bread and water.”

Thesis: Although they established America’s independence from England during the Revolutionary War, the Founding Fathers are in actuality another elite class who persuaded the other classes to support them during the war in order to keep control. Thus, like how England had tyranny over the Colonies, the Founding Fathers took over as tyrants to suit their needs.

Howard argued American Revolution as an effort of members of colonial elites to “create consensus of popular support for their continued rule” and to hold back the rebellions against them (Zinn 243). The rebellions stood up against rich colonial elites and the colonial leadership turned their anger against England. In addition, during the revolution differences occurred between upper and lower classes. The indentured servitude increased during revolution and nothing was done by revolution to end it. The revolution according to Zinn led to a “…substantial body of support, a national consensus…that even with the exclusion of ignored and oppressed people, could be called America” (Zinn 255). The declaration of independence was for life, liberty and happiness of rich white males. The poor white workers, women, black slaves, menial farmers were in the same old condition even after the revolution. The revolution merely

1. Each author had their own objective in writing each of the books. Both books tell the tale of history much like any other textbook. However, each book leaves out certain events creating a noticeable bias between the two. In The People’s History of the United States, the liberal author Howard Zinn writes about American history in a particularly unconventional way to convince the reader that there is another side to the history of the United States, one that does not necessarily invoke a feeling of patriotism, but rather showcases several flaws. On the other hand, Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen write about American history in a very patriotic way in A Patriot’s History of the United States to persuade the reader that one should feel a sense of pride in the history of the United States. Although they bear many similarities due to history not changing, the differences between The People’s History of the United States and A Patriot’s History of the United States are very pronounced due to the bias of each author.

Anglicization of the Britain’s American colonies was a big event for the course of not only American or British history, but world history. The colonists adopting many British ways and becoming very patriotic towards the “mother country” had a large effect on the events that unfolded in the late 18th century. While it is true that the American colonists were incredibly British during the beginning to the mid-18th century, the colonies had been around long enough to develop their own culture and way of doing things. The series of events and acts that were imposed on the colonists post French and Indian War got the ball rolling on what came to be known as the American Revolution. The colonists were so fed up with the way in which the British were tightening their hold on the colonies to the point where they were driven to rebellion. The combination of British and underlying American ideals in the pre-revolution era were a necessarily pre-requisite and important component of what would become the American Revolution.

essay. Hook is a much better writer than Zinn. Hook is able to point out all

Poor people had always been the backbone of the U.S. Their contribution to building America has always been overlooked. Rich people look upon the lower class with distaste, calling the unfortunate ones, “savages.” This is why Zinn named Chapter 3 of his book, “People’s History,” “Persons of Mean and Vile Conditions.” He wanted to shed light on those who were taken advantage of while history was in the making— the slaves, the poor people, the Indians also known as the “persons of Mean and Vile Conditions,” in the eyes of the wealthy. Since the rich does not want to be categorized with the poor, they have several techniques and strategies to maintain the status quo where the rich white people were on top of the social pyramid, the poor blacks and Indians on the bottom. For example, some of the techniques are to prohibit interracial marriage between the blacks and whites so “that the white population could remain ‘pure’ and in control.” (Zinn 35), “Negroes were forbidden to carry any arms while the white….would get muskets……the distinctions of status between white and black servants became more and more clear.” (Zinn 56) Authors of history textbooks, traditional historians, and politicians will definitely argue about the assertions made by Howard Zinn. They will say something similar to, “Zinn is unpatriotic.” But isn’t it unpatriotic to call the people whose back the U.S. was built upon, “persons of mean and vile conditions”?

Howard Zinn’s, Peoples’ History of the US and Larry Schweikart’s, Patriots’ History of the US are two analytical views on history that most people would consider politically conflicting. Zinn’s Marxist book was widely praised by liberal activist and Schweikart’s book is greatly publicized by conservatives like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. These two widely known historians turned their focus on writing two historical pieces that would fill in the “historical holes” that weren’t being taught in the educational systems. It created a type of diverse learning that made for a great argument while still allowing the readers to understand all sides of the topics at hand. Zinn really dismissed the common “white mans history” and focused his approach on a multiple minority perspective. Schweikart’s book is very different in the sense he takes aim at Zinn as he targets words like “great discovery” and “war on terror” which Zinn only used as scare quotes. Schweikart’s book really reads like old history textbooks from the moral principals of the American founders that built this nation to the ideological view of American prosperity. No matter who shares the views of the political perspectives or condemns them because of its bias stances both historians felt responsible in writing the history of the United States.

The American Revolution was precipitated by the irritation of the wealthy due to tax acts imposed by Britain on the colonies. The rich did not like the taxes because of the negative effect the tax acts had on personal financial interests, but the Colonial masses were convinced by men like John Dickinson and Patrick Henry; Dickinson wrote extensively on how the British collection of taxes on the Colonies was illegal and Henry believed taxation shouldn’t be allowed unless the Colonies were properly represented. The writings of John Locke were also influential in creating interest for breaking away from Great Britain.

The cause and effects of the American Revolution (1775-1783) are quite controversial among students and historians alike. One opinion believes that the American Revolution was a conservative movement, meaning that the revolution sought to preserve original American values while trying to eliminate some negative aspects of the New World, such as its ruler, Great Britain. While Americans achieved independence from England in the end, America’s initial traits were not preserved, but rather altered. The Revolution drastically changed political and social features of the United States but the economy was hardly affected.

Arguably one of the most important parts of US history is the American Revolution. Without the revolution there would be no United States because it never would have broke apart from Britain. Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of The United States, and David Kennedy’s The American Pageant both discuss the American Revolution. When describing the revolution, Zinn chooses to describe the different points of view of the everyday people in the colonies and the people in charge, while Kennedy describes the colonists as all having one perspective. The result is that Zinn paints a more full picture of the events including the first protests, the Boston Massacre, and the Boston Tea Party.

For eight grueling years, the fathers of our genealogy fought a battle that would transcend the limits of 13 colonies. An analysis of The Radicalism of the American Revolution by Gordon Wood shows that the American Revolution (AR) commenced the progress of uniting the States of America, all the while terminating Britain's omnipotent reign. Through direct and indirect revolt and rebellion from the perpetuation of British customs, the revolutionary era of the American Revolution birthed profound economic reform and radical social change.

The American Revolution, although thought to be so, was not something that all the colonists of America wanted to happen. The colonists fell under one of three opinions on independence: a patriot, a loyalist, or a neutral. The patriots were completely done with Great Britain and wanted independence. The loyalists wanted the colonies they lived in to remain a part of the glorious British Empire. Lastly, the neutrals didn’t know where they stood concerning independence, or didn’t care. Despite many arguments given by either side, patriot or loyalist, a copious amount of colonists didn’t have or want a side.

The American Revolution was an important time for the Americans who felt like they would achieve higher standards of success without The United Kingdom taking all of their money.” For

This book has proven to be an enlightening read. It both teaches and inspires. Howard Zinn has offered us a perspective of the real story of American history heretofore unavailable to us – history from the perspective of real people – immigrant laborers, American women, the working poor, factory workers, African and Native Americans.