Howard Zinn: A Theoretical Analysis

In keeping with his general thesis that American history is best understood through a Marxist lens, Howard Zinn in the fourth and fifth chapters of A People’s History of the United States argues that the American Revolution is essentially a tool for the landed elite to secure their place at the top of the existing social order. Zinn’s Marxist interpretation of the American Revolution is nearly diametrically opposed to Daniel Flynn’s capitalist interpretation in Howard Zinn’s Biased History. While Zinn argues that the Revolutionary War is an ingenious ploy fought by the poor for the sake of the rich and hidden behind the facade of freedom, Flynn rebuts, pronouncing that the Revolution is an event that served as an example for self-government …show more content…
Zinn uses powerful qualitative and quantitative evidence throughout his book to support his claims. He claims that “We have here a forecast of the long history of American politics, the mobilization of lower-class energy by upper-class politicians, for their own purposes. This was not purely deception; it involved, in part, a genuine recognition of lower-class grievances, which helps to account for its effectiveness as a tactic over the centuries” (Zinn, Chapter 4). He goes on to cite American historian Gary Nash: “James Otis, Samuel Adams, Royall lyler, Oxenbridge Thacher, and a host of other Bostonians, linked to the artisans and laborers through a network of neighborhood taverns, fire companies, and the Caucus, espoused a vision of politics that gave credence to laboring-class views and regarded as entirely legitimate the participation of artisans and even laborers in the political process” (Zinn, Chapter 4). He claims that the poor did not benefit to the same degree as did the rich (if at all). He then quotes a newspaper editor who “wrote about the growing ‘Number of Beggers and wandering Poor’ in the streets of the city” (Zinn). He continues: “Letters in the papers questioned the distribution of wealth: ‘How often have our Streets been covered with Thousands of Barrels of Flour for trade, while our near Neighbors can hardly procure enough to make a Dumplin to satisfy hunger?’” (Zinn). Flynn’s argument lacks the logos that makes Zinn’s so successful. Another reason why I agree more with Zinn, is that Howard Zinn uses fallacious reasoning to support his claims. He reasons that “The fact that America was half free” discredits Zinn’s image of America “as a uniquely cruel slaveholding society subjugating human beings for profit” (Flynn). As if that justifies

Show More

Related Documents: Howard Zinn: A Theoretical Analysis

Literature Review on Mindfulness-Based Therapy Essay