If democracy were to be given any meaning, if it were to go beyond the limits of capitalism and nationalism, this would not come--if history were any guide--from the top. It would come through citizens' movements, educating, organizing, agitating, striking, boycotting, demonstrating, threatening those in power with disruption of the stability they needed.
The above quotation, taken from the final pages of A People's History of the United States, neatly summarizes the thesis that Robert Zinn presents in his definitive chronicle of the United States.
From first contact by Europeans to the war on terror (a supplement added to the final addition of the book before Zinn’s death), A People's History provides an unflinching look at America's development from the perspective of the outsiders, underdogs, and scapegoats that have littered its century-spanning path. Beginning with the mistreatment of natives and the abhorrent sin of slavery (underscored by the obscene irony of the Declaration of Independence and its claim that all men are created equal), the book broadens in the late 19th century and beyond to chronicle thech struggle of labor to win basic rights for working people.
Zinn's goal is a noble one, and like most noble goals it is uncompromising in its zeal. As a result, there are times when his thinking struck me as a bit simplistic—in every state-sanctioned action, in every piece of legislation, in every presidential pronouncement, Zinn saw an unflinching drive of a system to protect itself. Any progress could be chalked up solely to appeasement, not enlightenment, and anyone in the upper echelons of power has only bad intentions. He takes pains to emphasize that the issue is more the structure of the system, rather than deliberate conspiracy, but there is a cynicism to his work that implies conspiracy even when it doesn't state it.
However, Zinn makes no secret of his stance, and his positions are honestly argued, a strategy that is harder and more just than tweaking facts while feigning objectivity. As a whole, he presents things fairly (one exception: in his discussion of the Rosenbergs, Zinn strongly implies their innocence e and suggests their conviction was essentially a propaganda coup. In truth, documents revealed after the fall of the Soviet Union and available to the grand jury at the time prove their guilt. While this information was presumably unavailable when the work was first published, it should have been added to subsequent editions). What’s more, he is correct in his argument that the preponderance of American history os of the “top-down” approach, focused exclusively on the activities of statesmen and the upper classes, and the rest of the country is presented wit ha few token asides where it is presented at all. A People’s History goes a long way to address this imbalance, and its success is justified.