Chapter Summary Of Chapter 20 By Howard Zinn

Zinn spoke clearly and in depth about women and Native Americans in chapter seven discussing how they were the most interior form during that time frame because they were needed, were dealt with more by patronization than by force. The Indians during that time were exterior and were not needed-indeed, an obstacle-could be dealt with by sheer force, except that sometimes the language of paternalism preceded the burning of villages. (chp.7) The theme explains the white American oppression of Native Americas. The Native Americans were sacred away by the American government and forced to move because they were threatened by them.

Howard Zinn represents this through sections in his book “A People’s History of the United States.”

In looking at more contemporary issues, Zinn utilizes interview records and other hard documentation to show us the real stories. For example, the government moved slowly to end segregation, fearful of a change of the face of American power. We see how two of America’s favorite presidents, Eisenhower and Kennedy, did little to change the system during their administrations. Lyndon Johnson pushed for passage of the Civil Rights Bill of 1964. This was viewed

Question 1: For many Americans, the 1960s began with JFK’s “Age of Camelot,” an era that seemed to exude confidence in American institutions. Yet, by the early 1970s, those expectations and attitudes seemed to be replaced by a sense of bitterness and cynicism. Discuss and analyze the causes and consequences of this profound attitudinal shift.

The 1970s was an eventful time in United States history. During the decade citizens saw positive actions committed by government officials such as ending the Vietnam War and negative actions such as the Watergate scandal. Notable, the United States documented an “unreported resistance” among its citizens. The “unreported resistance” was made of the numerous American men and women who did not support the government actions at the time. They protested nuclear plants, government munitions deals with Nicaragua, and they were not accurately represented in voting.

In 1980, the United States was emerging from a troubled decade. The 1970s had been marked by an ugly end to the Vietnam War, the demoralizing Watergate spectacle, rampant inflation, unemployment and an energy crisis. The Soviets had just invaded Afghanistan, rejuvenating

Zinn opens chapter with the recognition that “war and jingoism might postpone, but could not fully suppress, the class anger that came from the realities of ordinary life”.  Despite the brief interlude that momentarily quelled class conflict, the issues at home had never been resolved and resurfaced with a vengeance.  More and more writers were writing from a Socialist mindset:  Upton Sinclair published The Jungle in 1906, as a commentary on Chicago’s meatpacking industry. In writing the book, Sinclair was influenced by writers like Jack London, a Socialist who had grown up in poverty in the Bay Area.  London publish The Iron Heel in 1906, warning Americans about fascism and indicts the capitalist system” In the face of the

In the duration of one year, 1968, the American national mood shifted from general confidence and optimism to chaotic confusion. Certainly the most turbulent twelve months of the post-WWII period and arguably one of the most disturbing episodes the country has endured since the Civil War, 1968 offers the world a glimpse into the tumultuous workings of a revolution. Although the entire epoch of the 1960's remains significant in US history, 1968 stands alone as the pivotal year of the decade; it was the moment when all of the nation's urges toward violence, sublimity, diversity, and disorder peaked to produce a transformation great enough to blanket an entire society. While some may superficially disagree, the evidence found in the Tet

-Did the end of the war and emancipation change the situation of African Americans? How so? And if not, why not?

History can be defined as the study of past events, focused particularly in human affairs. Historians must research and infer to propose educated guesses to correctly document events of the past, which leaves a lot up to personal interpretation of limited facts. People often forget there is not just one sole history of something. Rather, a history of a people is composed of many different individuals living in the same time. Perspective can skew what history becomes. The past does not change, but our interpretations of the past do. More often than not, however, only one perspective is included in the retelling of a historical event.

1.According to Zinn, what is the purpose for writing A People’s History of the United States?

The 1960’s and 70’s were filled with turbulent changes. The US was still reeling from containment and its domino policy, leading it to believe that it had the right to exercise influence in foreign affair. One foreign affair was known as Vietnam. The Vietnam War was the longest war in the nation’s history. This war, from both abroad and at home, drastically changed the society of America, socially, economically, and politically. It caused for much anti-war sentiment and fueled the counter culture movement, it caused inflation and contributed to the stagflation, and brought down Johnson’s reputation and caused for several changes in legislation.

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.

This thematic standpoint in return provides ground for a second major theme; the 1960s was home to the birth of civil rights movements and forever changed the American idea of the status quo. To a large extent, it is agreeable that that the 1960s serves as the era that led to activism in the US. Anderson is able to confirm and strengthen his standpoint by the fact that it was during one of the greatest milestones of the 1960s, the Vietnam War, that for the first time in the history of the US, the government was subjected to criticism and attacks against their “ways”. This can be evidenced by the fact that Americans, which were majority college students, took to the streets to protest government action. At the time, the policies and actions put forth by the government were seen to be very secretive and wrong. Citizens were hastily informed about the need to stop the spread of communism at the expense of capitalism. Not only were government policies seen as corrupt, the government had kept the American society in the dark concerning the actual situation in Vietnam. There seemed to be no cost that was worth retreating from Vietnam. Draft calls were constantly increasing and the war itself began to result in federal expenditures, deficits, and inflationary pressures ( Anderson 90). For some Americans, the war not only damaging, but unfair. Mexican Americans were the poorest and

Violence and war is notable throughout history. However, it is lazy to say that this proves humans are naturally violent. Rather than using nature as an excuse for those who chose to act violently it’s important we recognize that we have a choice to decide how we act. In Howard Zinn’s, “Violence and Human Nature” He shows that violence is not an instinct but that the environment in which they live in provokes them to act violently or peacefully depending on their choice (43). In City of God, a film concentrating on the gangs of Rio de Janeiro during the 1960’s to the 1980’s, specifically the township of Cidade de Deus, we are introduced to various characters who all make different choices under different motivations. Rocket, the little brother to a member of the Tender Trio, who are essentially the Robin Hood’s of the City of God, to act non-violently despite his environment and the influences around him.