Howard Zinn uses historical writings to explain an imbalance in objectivity, perspective, and justice. History books are written by the victors not the vanquished which makes the perspective of the story teller biased. As the story of Christopher Columbus he has been hailed as a hero especially in public schools and recognized as an historical occasion to have a day off granted by the government. Many as we grow more educational find out this sinister legacy that was swept under the carpet because there is evidence that supports while in the “new world” he destroyed the native peoples of islands he explored and it devastated native populations. There is no justice being done when the perspective does not reveal a whole truth when the objective
“In that inevitable taking of sides which comes from selection and emphasis in history, I prefer to try to tell the story of the discovery of America from the viewpoint of the Arawaks, of the Constitution from the standpoint of the slaves, of Andrew Jackson as seen by the Cherokees…” (Zinn, A People’s History of the United States, pg. 10). Society as a whole expects historians to be impartial, to report the events of the past as they happened, without incorporating their own thoughts into these events. We choose to believe that they are politically neutral, that they have no bias, and that they report history fairly and that everything occurred the way they say. However, as historian Howard Zinn points out in A People’s History, most historians have succumbed to the disturbing trend of glossing over and sugarcoating some of history’s most horrific events, excusing them as necessary for “progress,” and then moving on.
When we think about the revolutions firstly Latin America come to our mind. In addition to this military coups, repressive government in contrast to these armed guerilla organizations, liberation struggles which is taking place in the streets and of course the most known revolu-tion, the Cuban Revolution. Cuban Revolution has always been the subject of curiosity. In the backyard of the United States, although the American embargo, revolution has taken place was a big surprise for the whole world. When compared with other examples of the world, Cuban Revolution is more socialist and also this revolution continues to today. These are the special characteristic of the Cuban Revolution. In the light of these we have this argument question
Adam Smith and Karl Marx were completely contrasting economists throughout their time and had an enormous effect on the world and the way we view economics. They represent the ideas of capitalism and socialism.
The article “Confronting Inequality,” written by Paul Krugman, a professor at Princeton University, emphasizes that the middle class suffers from social inequality and economic inequality. Krugman suggests building a stronger safety net so the gap between the poor and rich can be limited to by raising of the taxes. Krugman uses this claim to highlight the fact that the middle class needs to be stronger and the only way to achieve that is to have a strong safety net. Krugman says the rich use loopholes in the tax system to cheat their way out of high taxes, and the poor pay a relatively high tax compared to what they should be paying. Krugman states if these ideas were incorporated into society, it would link the gap between
To what extent were the causes of Cuban revolution primarily social or political or economical? Specify long and short-term causes.
Adam Smith, an advocate of capitalism, in his book, The Wealth of Nations wrote that all individuals are selfish and by performing to the best of their capabilities towards their own selfish interests they contribute towards the nation’s collective growth. Karl Marx, on the other hand criticized capitalism and believed that socialism and communism are society’s best chance of maximizing individual happiness, about which he wrote in his book Das Kapital. In this paper, we will compare and contrast the economics theories of Adam Smith and Karl Marx on the lines of labor theory of value, division of labor, alienation of workers from labor and human happiness and surplus profit and its social implications. This paper will also discuss how…
Race relations within the revolutionary Caribbean complicated the Twentieth Century, leaving questions of freedom and nationalism open to interpretation. In A Nation for All, Alejandro De La Fuente examines various meanings of race within post-Spanish Cuba, Batista’s Cuba, and socialist Cuba, and how racial tensions aligned with revolutionary ideas. Rather than simply adopting a chronological organization of events, Alejandro De La Fuente gains the reader’s attention by utilizing a thematic scheme. The idea of an inequality, masked by revolutionary, egalitarian rhetoric, remains central to each thematic division. De La Fuente’s work serves to undermine the elitist pretense of equality in Twentieth Century Cuba and expose the long-term effects
Income inequality has grown significantly during this past decades and this phenomenon continues to increase over the years. This problem is constantly discussed in the daily news all around the world. Several consequences of this increase of inequality between people leads to economic problems such as high unemployment rates, lack of work for young people, fall of demand for certain product. The gap between rich and poor is increasing, the rich are richer and the poor are poorer as a result politicians and economists try to adopt certain policies in order to reduce this gap. The United States exhibits a wide difference of wealth distribution between rich and poor people, which is larger than any other major developed country.
In the year 1176, one of the most important documents of American history was published, the Declaration of Independence. Two writers had varied opinions and interpretations of this document. Bernard Bailyn, a historian, wrote his own interpretation of the Declaration. He explained how it [the Declaration] represented the “colonists’ deepest fears and beliefs.” The colonists believed that they were destined for a special role in history. Bailyn also went on to explain England was trying to enslave the colonists. Bailyn insists that his opinion was unbiased, uninfluenced, and based solely on his thoughts.
Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States states how Zinn’s biases influenced his relationship with American history. He references his youth as a dock worker, and his military service, to explain how he couldn’t remain objective regarding his choices of what parts of history to teach, thereby displaying bias. He states that because the US was founded and is ran by self-interested white men with a desire to create a strong central government that could wage war on the whims of an individual, American history is a study of classism and arrogance. Zinn also claims that American history is “a white man’s history” because there is no mention of Black people or Native Americans beyond
Zinn’s idea of a Utopian society isn’t completely unreasonable; Zinn provides examples of prior movements that would support his society. He cites the sixties and seventies as a time when the Establishment failed to produce national unity; how there was mass change in things like family, marriage, sex, and other situations that cannot be
Question 1: Zinn portrays the Nixon presidency in general as a failure all on its own and the Watergate scandal adding to the failure as a dirty play by Nixon. Zinn thinks Nixon was involved in “dirty tricks” because he thinks Nixon knew all about and personally orchestrated the Watergate scandal. He proves this by telling us that top Republican and Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives that they would not support any criminal proceedings against him.
Adam Smith, born in 1723, laid the foundation for classical economics in the eighteenth century and established a paradigm on how to tackle economic decisions on a micro and macro level. Smith’s Wealth of Nation’s outlined many of contemporary economics’ key concepts and laws that offered radical criticisms against the dominant economic thinking of the time, mercantilism. Karl Marx, born in 1818, bore witness to the technological innovations and social conditions that came along with the Industrial Revolution, rise of capitalism, and the growth of Europe’s oversea empires. Marx wrote Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, which sharply criticized Smith’s benevolent depictions of capitalism and the Industrial Revolution. Smith and Marx wrote from different vantage points in history but both offered insights into the changing worlds around them.
Whenever there is political corruption, power and control are involved. Although there are a few similarities between Castro’s dictatorship and Big Brother’s totalitarian from 1984, not many parallels can be seen.