"A People's History of the United States"

By TRACEY COLLING

Staff Writer

"A People’s History of the United States: 1492 – Present" by Howard Zinn recalls history’s events from a viewpoint that is not familiar to the average American reader.

Most textbooks and lessons taught in schools present an almost biased standpoint of American history, glorifying Christopher Columbus, American patriots and such holidays as Thanksgiving.

Not so in this book.

Zinn’s begins with the interaction of Arawak Native Americans and Christopher Columbus. Th book quickly recounts European exploration not only as a series of voyages, but also as a means to conquer land via immoral actions.

Zinn examines the evolutionary process of human behavior beginning with Columbus’ actions. Emphasing both the negative and positive aspects of history, he notes that Native- American villages were pillaged and exploited by Europeans who sought the land to be their own piece of freedom from British rule.

"A People's History of the United States: 1492-Present" by Howard Zinn

But this view of history is rarely taught in U.S. grade schools.

Eastern Michigan University junior Kim Russell, 20, of South Lyon previously had been taught in school that Columbus was indeed a patriotic hero of his time and he was the one who gallantly discovered America.

Nineteen-year-old Josh Newkirk – who also had been taught a similar view of Columbus – believes the truth should be taught, regardless of whether it is flattering.

"The truth is better than fake lies," he said.

Russell argues that history is sometimes sugar coated so that a false sense of pride is fostered among Americans.

And it would not be surprising if most Americans feel the same way as Russell. More and more history is being presented truthfully, and many people are reassessing what they have learned.

Allen Park resident Brian Smith, 19, believes the fundamentals of history should be taught in grade schools but feels that the focus should not be about the politics of why something happened. That may make history too confusing, he said.

Zinn also discusses the introduction of indentured servants and slaves in the New World. 

Setting up colonies or towns in the Americas was arduous work. Farmers needed people to work the fields, and indentured servants – mainly debtors – made up the majority of the task force. Native Americans were also used as slaves and servants, but to a lesser extent.

Europeans believed Native Americans were primitive which, to them, meant that they were inferior beings.

But what constitutes as primitive? And is it a deprecating statement?

Russell interprets "primitive" as a society that came first. The word, she said, carries a derogatory meaning when used to describe other cultures.

So, the settlers’ and explorers’ superior attitude marked the foundation of subsequent intolerance and hostility throughout America’s progression. And intolerance can still be seen in many cities today.

"In my town of South Lyon, there have even been protests against immigrants, and this committee against immigration put their sign up in front of a Tae Kwon Do place owned by Korean immigrants," said Russell.

Despite the fact that situations like that do occur, Smith commented that intolerance isn’t as prevalent as it had once been.

"People in today’s society... understand other cultures much better than we did back then," he said. "We are not as one dimensional as we were."

Zinn notes that as callousness increased in the colonies, so did the need for servants and slaves. But determining who were "heathens" – and thus candidates for slavery – and who were not became hazy among religious sects. Those slaves who "redeemed" themselves and converted to Christianity could no longer be considered heathens.

Consequently, many people looked to Africa.

Africans became the New World’s dominant economic commodity. The transportation of African slaves was harsh on individuals, however. Most became ill from the conditions they endured, and many died from the long, grueling trip.

"[Colonists] were only thinking of the impact [slaves] would have on their plantations and in their fields but not how it would impact society and life for years to come," Smith said.

According to Zinn, after African slaves were introduced to the colonies, social ways of thinking began to change. Class lines and color lines became more distinguished. The wealthy were kept separate from the poor, and Europeans, as a whole, separated themselves from Native Americans and Africans.

Zinn explains that when the settlers came to the New World, they were trying to escape the tyranny of British rule. They wanted freedom to have liberal religious and government practices and land division.

But as government and religious practices were being established, their roots were derived from European systems. The colonists were enforcing the very practices that they originally had tried to escape. The government became an autocratic system that bypassed the voice of its people, Zinn argues.

"It was intended to be better but has evolved into something just as bad," Russell said.

The colonists were well-intentioned, Zinn says, but the outcomes of some of their actions have proved not to be so great. He argues that parts of American government seem hypocritical.

Some beg to differ.

"I think the basis of our government was fair and separate from the tyranny of Europeans," Smith said.