People’s History of the United States, Part II

As I mentioned in Part 1, Howard Zinn, for a large part of the book, views the development of the United States through the lens of class struggle between labor and capital; his analysis of slavery is no exception. One of the major mechanisms used to suppress class struggle in the United States was a carefully constructed racial hierarchy. Racism was used used to pit poor, exploited white against black; thereby, preventing them from realizing their lot was a consequence of the same forces and uniting in rebellion.

Racism was becoming more and more practical. Edmund Morgan, on the basis of his careful study of slavery in Virginia, sees racism not as “natural” to black-white difference, but something coming out of class scorn, a realistic device for control. “If freemen with disappointed hopes should make common cause with slaves of desperate hope, the results might be worse than anything Bacon had done. The answer to the problem, obvious if unspoken and only gradually recognized, was racism, to separate dangerous free whites from dangerous black slaves by a screen of racial contempt.” – pg. 56

Racism was not just used to keep poor whites at odds with black slaves, but also as a tool against the Indians. Those in power, not only by whipping up racist sentiments against the Indians, but by pushing poor whites onto the land that was in closest proximity to the Indians, made poor whites pawns in the push for Indian removal.

The forces that led to removal did not come, Van Every insists, from the poor white frontiersmen who were neighbors of the Indians. They came from industrialization and commerce, the growth of populations, of railroads and cities, the rise in value of land, and the greed of businessmen. “Party managers and land speculators manipulated the growing excitement…

Press and pulpit whipped up the frenzy.” Out of that frenzy the Indians were to end up dead or exiled, the land speculators richer, the politicians more powerful. As for the poor white frontiersman, he played the part of a pawn, pushed into the first violent encounters, but soon dispensable. – pg. 136

In December 1838, President Van Buren spoke to Congress:

It affords sincere pleasure to apprise the Congress of the entire removal of the Cherokee Nation of Indians to their new homes west of the Mississippi. The measures authorized by Congress at its last session have had the happiest effects. – pg. 147 – 148

People’s History of the United States, Part I

Part I: An Introduction to the Summary of A People’s History of the United States

Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States is a fascinating story, from Columbus’s landing in the Caribbean to the 2000 US Presidential election, that has as its protagonists the people and groups who’s voices are often excluded from the historical narrative of our country: Native American, blacks, women, poor people, the disenfranchised, and the exploited. A People’s History is an ambitious, but powerful story of ordinary people working arduously to make their lives better. Often those gains came in inches year-by-year as concessions were clawed from those in power, such as the labor and abolitionist movements. Other times those in power, either in a genuine attempt to fulfill this country’s lofty ideals or as a means to keep the peace, would propel the struggle of the marginalized forward. Although it is an ambitious work, perhaps as Zinn himself admits too ambitious, it is an empowering story that focuses on what ordinary people are capable of:

As for the subtitle of this book, 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.

That makes it a biased account, one that leans in a certain direction. I am not troubled by that, because the mountain of history books under which we all stand leans so heavily in the other direction-so tremblingly respectful of states and statesmen and so disrespectful, by inattention, to people’s movements-that we need some counterforce to avoid being crushed into submission. All those histories of this country centered on the Founding Fathers and the Presidents weigh oppressively on the capacity of the ordinary citizen to act. They suggest that in times of crisis we must look to someone to save us: in the Revolutionary crisis, the Founding Fathers; in the slavery crisis, Lincoln; in the Depression, Roosevelt; in the Vietnam-Watergate crisis, Carter. And that between occasional crises everything is all right, and it is sufficient for us to be restored to that normal state. They teach us that the supreme act of citizenship is to choose among saviors, by going into a voting booth every four years to choose between two white and well-off Anglo-Saxon males of inoffensive personality and orthodox opinions.

The idea of saviors has been built into the entire culture, beyond politics. We have learned to look to stars, leaders, experts in every field, thus surrendering our own strength, demeaning our own ability, obliterating our own selves. But from time to time, Americans reject that idea and rebel. – pg. 631-632

The Art of War: Notable Quotes

Background

The Art of War, although attributed to the author Sun Tzu, the historical records of the time cast some doubt. The Historical Records (Shi Chi) of Ssu-ma Ch’ien [Sima Qian], describe Sun Tzu as a native of Ch’i [Qi], who secured service with Ho-Lu, King of Wu after impressing him with his military skill. Such information would suggest that Sun Tzu lived near the end of the Spring and Autumn period, ~500 BC, however, there is reason to believe that this date is incorrect because of the absence of reference to Sun Tzu in the major works of the period. Also whoever wrote The Art of War described war in a way that did not exist during the Spring and Autumn period; the war that characterized the Spring and Autumn period was small-scale and amateurish. The author of The Art of War describes war as a matter of vital importance to the state and fought using large armies with professional officers. Historians agree, regardless of the authorship,The Art of War was written during the Warring States Period of Chinese history, between 475-221 BC, which followed the Spring and Autumn period (771-448 BC). During the Warring States period seven major states vied for control over the region that would eventually become China: Qin, Jin, Han, Wei, Zhao, Chu, Yan. By the end of the Warring States period the state of Qin would have conquered all the remaining states. The Art of War is a product of this time of intense conflict of China and provides an analysis of war as understood at the time.

 

Autobiography of Malcolm X: Summary and Thoughts

Introduction

I recently finished reading The Autobiography of Malcolm X: As Told to Alex Haley. Honestly, it was the recent events  in Ferguson, Missouri surrounding the Michael Brown shooting, the Darren Wilson Grand Jury decision, and the sentiments shared on Facebook which prompted me to read the book. As a white male in the United States of American, I am largely ignorant of the social, political, and cultural conditions of many of my fellow Americans. I have decided it is finally time to change that.

Fittingly Malcolm X once said, “My alma mater was books…” Books offer a way to see issues from a different perspective, to live a life other than your own. Through reading this book, I hoped that I would gain perspective on the racial struggle in the United States not only during the Civil Rights Movement, but also today. Interestingly, I set out to change my perspective and I began by reading a book about a man who would radically alter his own perspective throughout his life.