The Twentieth Century: A People's History [Englisch] [Taschenbuch]

The author James Baldwin once said, "No one can possibly know what is about to happen. It is happening each time, for the first time, for the only time." However, I strongly disagree with his statement, for history repeats itself and works in cycles. Howard Zinn explains the Twentieth Century in his book, The Twentieth Century: A People's History. His views are very left wing and Marxist. While reading this book, his tone and style seemed oddly familiar. It seemed generally similar to feelings of discontent, present in the Nineteenth Century. Zinn's sentiments that government's role in America are very parallel to those put forth by the New England Transcendentalists. Then, I came across the quote by Henry David Thoreau, from his book Civil Disobedience: "The government which governs best, is that which governs not at all." When I started reading this book, I had no background on Zinn. I wasn't ready for his self-proclaimed "biased accounts" of history. I had expected a more traditional textbook approach, where no opinion is offered. I found it very refreshing, at first, to read his style of writing. I enjoyed much of his book, especially his citation of other historians, his references to literature of the time or that was set in the time. However, towards the end of the book, I found his negativity overwhelming. He omitted or downplayed the importance of many figures who seem to be noteworthy in America. I thought that the mention of Franklin Roosevelt was somewhat lacking. After coming into office in the Depression, Roosevelt began many innovative programs, such as the WPA and the CCC, to put Americans back to work and to try to relieve some of the hardships of the Depression. Zinn seemed to minimized Roosevelt's importance and his accomplishments. I really liked the way that Zinn included another historian's thoughts on a particular topic. On page 54, he devotes almost a page to the noted historian Richard Hofstadter, whose views are often similar to mine, which made the book that much more enjoyable. Another thing I enjoyed was the fairly frequent citing of literary works written during that time or in later years, but set in the period of discussion. On page 85, Zinn states, "F. Scott Fitzgerald, in an article, Echoes of the Jazz Age,' said: It was a borrowed time anyway the whole upper tenth of the nation living with the insouciance of a grand duc and the casualness of chorus girls.'" Having read Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby, this statement really had an effect on me. I could understand exactly what the quote was intended to mean. Zinn also quotes John Steinbeck's book, The Grapes of Wrath (pp.90-91). "And the dispossessed, the migrants, flowed into California, two hundred and fifty thousand, and three hundred thousand...And in the south he saw the golden oranges hanging on the trees, the little golden oranges on the dark green trees; and guards with shotguns patrolling the lines so a man might not pick an orange for a thin child, oranges to be dumped if the price was low..." Being familiar with Steinbeck, I had another personal insight, as I did with Fitzgerald. The last line was especially introspective. It made me stop and think about what was really going on during the Depression and how bad the poverty was in America at that time. Zinn often reminds us of countless things that America has done that he views as wrong. Among the many, many countries and people that America has wronged, he pointed out a few examples that really made an impact on me. First, that the United States was very guilty of genocide in the Philippines; and second, that the military dictatorship that was established in Greece after the war was supported by the U.S. However, the statement that I found to be the most significant, was Zinn's impression of why America went to war with Japan. "It was not Hitler's attacks on the Jews that brought the United States into World War II....Japan's attack on China in 1937, her bombing of civilians at Nanking, had not provoked the United States to War. It was the Japanese attack on a link in the American Pacific Empire that did it." (pg. 112) There are many things that Zinn reminds the reader of, as if to keep reminding us that America is an evil giant intent on afflicting the world with problems due to its lack of common sense. Often Zinn is just trying to be a sensationalist. There isn't always a whole lot going on, but he makes it seem like a major event is around the corner. I did like the overall tone of the book. It was well written and kept my interest for the most part. Although Zinn's critical view of America is new and different at first, it became old after reading this book. I wouldn't mind an occasional reference to a mistake on America's part, but the constant discussion of it made the book hard to read at some points. Towards the end of the book, Zinn included this quote, which I would actually have recommended to put at the beginning so that the reader has some idea of what to expect. "As for the title of this book [The Twentieth Century: A People's History], it is not quite accurate; a "people's history" promises more than any one person can fulfill, and it is the most difficult kind of history to recapture. I call it that anyway, because, with all its limitations, it is a history disrespectful of governments and respectful of people's movements of resistance." p.281 I would recommend this book to anyone who wants a refreshingly different take on the Twentieth Century and doesn't mind hearing about America's faults and shortcomings. Overall, a good book.

The Rhode Island reader was incensed that Zinn would admit his bias. Frankly, I find it refreshing that Zinn admits that his history focuses on the people as opposed to leaders. This history is an attempt to help readers form a more complete view of American history in their minds. This is why Zinn does not push it as definitive, he recognizes that it isn't. However, it does one amazing job of reminding Americans to get off their high horse. Also, Zinn is an amazing writer, especially for non-fiction. It enthralled me.

A socialist view of history would probably be an interesting compliment to normal historical bias, if done right. Zinn, though, covers minor movements and events and somehow takes these to be the sum of modernity. Hardly revealing or informative, this book didn't impress me well. It's like one of those histories that claims the Civil War was the War of Northern Aggression..one-sided to the extreme.