Difference between revisions of "Howard Zinn"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(reviews)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
It does not incorporate the newer theories of history, but provides an energetic heavy-handed attack on conservatives, business, and white men.  His book is stuck in 1950, methodologically, and does not appreciate the scholarship of the last 4 decades in the "new" intellectual, political, economic, diplomatic, military, cultural or social history. His "newest" ideas are that the white male "working class" -- as well as blacks, Indians, and women -- are victims of capitalism, a stock notion of 1930s [[Socialism|socialist]] philosophy regarding workers.  
 
It does not incorporate the newer theories of history, but provides an energetic heavy-handed attack on conservatives, business, and white men.  His book is stuck in 1950, methodologically, and does not appreciate the scholarship of the last 4 decades in the "new" intellectual, political, economic, diplomatic, military, cultural or social history. His "newest" ideas are that the white male "working class" -- as well as blacks, Indians, and women -- are victims of capitalism, a stock notion of 1930s [[Socialism|socialist]] philosophy regarding workers.  
 +
 +
Michael Kazin, Professor in the Department of History at Georgetown University states that
 +
 +
<blockquote>A People's History is bad history, albeit gilded with virtuous intentions. Zinn reduces the past to a Manichean fable", whose failure to adequately explain why most Americans accepted the legitimacy of the capitalist republic "is grounded in a premise better suited to a conspiracy-monger's Web site than to a work of scholarship."<ref>[http://hnn.us/articles/4370.html Michael Kazin, "Howard Zinn's Disappointing History of the United States",] History News Network, 3-30-04</ref></blockquote>
 +
 +
Historian and author John Fea of Messiah College states that,
 +
 +
<blockquote>Zinn writes well and is quite inspiring, but his book is bad history. In fact, I would not even call it history. A People's History of the United States is a political tract that uses the past to promote a presentist agenda...Zinn's book violates virtually every rule of good historical thinking.<ref>[http://www.philipvickersfithian.com/search/label/Howard%20Zinn Howard Zinn vs. David Barton]</ref></blockquote>
  
 
[[Category: Historians]]
 
[[Category: Historians]]

Revision as of 22:42, September 2, 2009

Howard Zinn (born 1922) is an American historian, most famous for his book, A People's History of the United States. The book has sold over a million copies and gives a far-left interpretation of political history.

It does not incorporate the newer theories of history, but provides an energetic heavy-handed attack on conservatives, business, and white men. His book is stuck in 1950, methodologically, and does not appreciate the scholarship of the last 4 decades in the "new" intellectual, political, economic, diplomatic, military, cultural or social history. His "newest" ideas are that the white male "working class" -- as well as blacks, Indians, and women -- are victims of capitalism, a stock notion of 1930s socialist philosophy regarding workers.

Michael Kazin, Professor in the Department of History at Georgetown University states that

A People's History is bad history, albeit gilded with virtuous intentions. Zinn reduces the past to a Manichean fable", whose failure to adequately explain why most Americans accepted the legitimacy of the capitalist republic "is grounded in a premise better suited to a conspiracy-monger's Web site than to a work of scholarship."[1]

Historian and author John Fea of Messiah College states that,

Zinn writes well and is quite inspiring, but his book is bad history. In fact, I would not even call it history. A People's History of the United States is a political tract that uses the past to promote a presentist agenda...Zinn's book violates virtually every rule of good historical thinking.[2]