Scan barcode
missnerdinatrix's review against another edition
1.0
Books that talk about the truths behind historical events away from the sanitization of the status quo are wonderful. Using that concept to push outright lies and twisted facts so you can sell a book is NOT.
I don't care what narrative an author is trying to push: writing falsehood as actual history just to sell books with the wave of interest over an interesting topic isn't ethical. It erodes the entire fact that we love to study and discuss history not just for entertainment but preservation. Zinn is not preservation but a rewriter of truth for money.
I wouldn't accept this kind of shady misdirection and lack of proper citation from anyone, whether Zinn, Cambridge or Sesame Street and neither should anyone else.
I don't care what narrative an author is trying to push: writing falsehood as actual history just to sell books with the wave of interest over an interesting topic isn't ethical. It erodes the entire fact that we love to study and discuss history not just for entertainment but preservation. Zinn is not preservation but a rewriter of truth for money.
I wouldn't accept this kind of shady misdirection and lack of proper citation from anyone, whether Zinn, Cambridge or Sesame Street and neither should anyone else.
arehani's review against another edition
4.0
I started this in January 2010 and it took me until May 2012 to finish it, but I am finally finished!! A very enlightening read on the not-so-known underside of America's history.
krichardson's review against another edition
2.0
I think in some ways this book just aged very strangely. The purpose of "everything you never learned in history class" wasn't true for me, as most of these events were taught in my high school history class. Some specific takes also aged poorly (nuclear power, AIDS). The populist rhetoric sometimes sounded strange in 2024 since a lot of it has been coopted by MAGA.
Some of the other takes cannot be blamed on the passage of time and are just simply wrong. Looking at you, bothsidesism of Nazi Germany.
This book is biased and acknowledges that which I can respect, but I disagreed with some of the perspective. My ideological disagreements with this book would probably get me called an establishment stooge by the author. It would take a lot to convince me that democracy (not American democracy, but democracy generally) isn't the best form of government (not perfect but the best we've got) and this book didn't do it.
Some of the other takes cannot be blamed on the passage of time and are just simply wrong. Looking at you, bothsidesism of Nazi Germany.
This book is biased and acknowledges that which I can respect, but I disagreed with some of the perspective. My ideological disagreements with this book would probably get me called an establishment stooge by the author. It would take a lot to convince me that democracy (not American democracy, but democracy generally) isn't the best form of government (not perfect but the best we've got) and this book didn't do it.
millerj1326's review against another edition
informative
reflective
slow-paced
3.75
A classic in its own right! Very informative but equally dense. Reading, at times, felt like a chore.
djmcewen's review against another edition
2.0
I bought this a long time ago when I was in college. That right there should tell you something. At the time, I though it was damning history of the US. I now understand it was simply history and we have learned from and built upon that history to make a better world. Back then, I probably would have given it five stars. Today, the two stars are probably more than it deserves.
loesje_kr's review against another edition
5.0
This is my second read through andi definitely feel like my 21 years old eyes absorbed it a lot better than my 13 year old ones did. I appreciate that this is a history of the United States, so it doesn't attempt to include indigenous life prior to colonization. The US is a country built on oppression and colonization so it is appropriate to not describe the land and people before Columbus. Yes, it is biased but so too is every history. Textbooks tell one story of American superiority and this tells another.