A People's History of the United States

Traditional American history often focuses on "nationalist glorification," centering on presidents, generals, and wealthy pioneers. Zinn explicitly rejects this, arguing that these figures represent a small elite whose interests rarely aligned with the majority. Instead, he narrates the American story from the perspective of the "losers" of the traditional narrative: the Arawaks meeting Columbus, enslaved Africans, striking factory workers, and women fighting for basic rights.

This "bottom-up" approach aims to spark a "quiet revolution." Zinn’s goal wasn't a violent seizure of state power, but an intellectual shift where individuals realize they can exert control over their own lives and institutions. By focusing on the struggle of the many against the few, the book seeks to dismantle the idea that history is something that happens to people, rather than something created by them.

One of Zinn's most provocative arguments is that the "color line"—systemic racism—was not a natural phenomenon but a tool manufactured by the elite. He points to early colonial history where poor whites and enslaved Blacks cooperated in rebellions. To prevent such a formidable lower-class alliance, the ruling class implemented laws and social structures to divide them, ensuring that poor whites felt a false sense of superiority that kept the economic status quo intact.

Similarly, Zinn reframes the American Revolution and subsequent wars as tactical distractions. He argues the Founding Fathers agitated for war with Britain partly to redirect internal class anger toward a foreign enemy. This pattern continues through his analysis of the 20th century, where he portrays conflicts like World War I and the Cold War as means for the government to expand foreign markets while suppressing radical domestic movements like socialism and labor unions.

From the very first chapter, Zinn prioritizes firsthand accounts that contradict the "official" record. Rather than celebrating Columbus’s "discovery," he uses witness accounts to detail the genocide of the Arawaks. He highlights the "Other Civil War"—the internal class struggles like the Anti-Rent movement and the Lowell girls’ strikes—that occurred simultaneously with the national conflict over slavery.

Zinn’s heroes are not the Roosevelts or the Jacksons, but figures like Mark Twain (for his anti-imperialism), Fannie Lou Hamer (for her civil rights activism), and Eugene V. Debs (for his socialist defiance). By elevating these names, Zinn provides a lineage for modern activists, suggesting that the "highest ideals" of the country are found in the Declaration of Independence’s promise of equality, which must be constantly wrestled away from "corporate robber barons."

While A People’s History has sold over two million copies and is a staple in high school and college classrooms, it remains a lightning rod for controversy. Critics from across the political spectrum, including fellow historians, have accused Zinn of "blatant omissions" and an uncritical reliance on biased sources. They argue that by focusing so exclusively on the crimes of the elite, Zinn fails to examine opposing views or the complexities of historical decision-making.

Defenders of the book, however, argue that Zinn never claimed to be "neutral." In his view, no history is neutral; traditional textbooks simply hide their pro-establishment bias behind a veneer of objectivity. By being "openly partial," Zinn intended to provide a necessary weight to the other side of the historical scale, forcing a change in how history is taught and whose stories are considered "important."