Worth the money at any price, this is a rousing compilation of articles from one of America's leading historians of the left, whose earlier and epochal *A People's History of the United States* has served as something of a bible to those revisionist historians and activists more interested in unvarnished fact than patriotic myth. This revealing volume demonstrates that same class conscious perspective, this time ranging over topics both historical and contemporary, including insights into Plato, Machiavelli, the morality of war, the civil rights crusade, and the historically neglected Ludlow massacre. The result is an omnivorous selection to say the least, but one that includes plenty of ideational grist to disagree with even for those on the political left, who may find his pacifist leanings not just impracticable but insensitive to neo-colonial oppression. Be that as it may, few chroniclers of America's past so thoroughly demonstrate the bankruptcy of the official record as does Zinn, who unlike the abjectly house-broken Arthur Schlesinger Jr. has thankfully never found a place in the corridors of Repubocrat power which whatever else can be said has proven so materially rewarding for the opportunistic. There is solace however in the realization that were Zinn's historical honesty to replace the usual highschool pablum, even MTV teenagers might discover an identity that preceded them, and realize that there are no rebels without causes, but only victories as yet unwon. Zinn's work is a signpost along the way.

"A People's History of the United States" forever changed the way I viewed the world and the system I grew up in. Continuing that tradition, "The Zinn Reader..", wakes up a desire in one's soul to rise up and do something about the injustices and hypocrisies that have dominated our past and continued to swallow our present. Professor Zinn write clearly, honestly, and furiously about topics ranging from the distribution of wealth to the ideal uses of scholarship and intellectualism. He lacks no emotion or fury, unlike many other historians. The main challenge Zinn makes it to exercise free thought, and "to be skeptical of someone else's reality." Very few historians, or writers for that matter, dare to look at the world from the perspective of the poor, the disenfranchised, the bombed, the murdered, the jailed, the conquered, the victim, but Zinn does exactly that, and in doing so puts out a masterful collection that not only instructs us in History, but also challenges our humanity and our place in the world.

How many times can you call a collection of political essays a page turner? Well, how many Howard Zinn books are there?

This is a really comprehensive collection of Zinn's work, and makes a nice compliment to his quintessential "People's History of the US." It picks up on the same subject matter, but in Zinn's voice as an observer to the great political struggles of this century. It is, of course, typical, liberal, activist-minded Zinn, but I view this as a good thing -- he has a great deal of perspective as both an academic and an activist.

As for my favorite parts...I was interested and impressed to read of Zinn's activism during the Civil Rights Movement. This is a great first-hand account from someone who was along for the ride. I also enjoy his discussion of pacifism in the context of WWII, which is a difficult and delicate subject to tackle. I respect that he attempts to explain his anti-war beliefs with respect to this "good war."

I have found this book useful in very practical ways as well. I used some essays as texts in the activist internship class I taught, and I also referenced the list of important and influential books Zinn includes in an appendix.

Though this little booklet may soon be overtaken by events, it's a fine reality check for where we are at the moment. As Chang makes clear, Patriot Act I renders the Fourth Amendment meaningless, at the same time it strips non-citizens of due process and constitutional guarantees. And though the text does at times read like a legal brief, the details are provided in succinct fashion that should alarm anyone concerned with safeguards against tyranny, whatever the source. Moreover, the threat promises to worsen as Ashcroft readies a sequel to PAI, further blurring the line between dissent and terrorism. Despite appearances, this is not a partisan issue. We all stand to lose unless we stand up for constitutional government and the right to dissent. Chang's represents a handy and inexpensive status report, that should be the duty of every citizen to read and act on.

If you're in the mood for a good scare, this will do you. It's amazing how fragile our liberties are, and how one little decision can place them in harm's way.

I definantly recommend this, regardless of the current climates, for a better understanding of the ways our liberties have been abused in the past, and how easily our privacy can be invaded without our even knowing.

Nancy Chang's concise summary of post 9/11 developments is an excellent primer on how dissent has been repressed and silenced in the name of anti-terrorism and how "patriotism" has been twisted into something resembling a Mccarthyite witch-hunt. She focuses on the USA PATRIOT Act, and her legal analysis of the profound unconstitutionality of some of its provisions is chilling. Her legal analysis is acute and accurate (she is the senior litigation lawyer with the Center for Constitutional Rights in NYC). Among other things, attorney-client communications are now being monitored if the client is suspected or accused of "terrorist" activities. The term "terrorism" has been so expanded and amplified by this Act as to make it applicable to many activities not normally considered to be within its ambit, as Ms. Chang details. This is a timely, up-to-the-minute introduction, and urgent reading for everyone concerned with the assault on civil rights now taking place in the guise of fighting "terrorism."

American Power and the New Mandarins, first published in 1967, is a collection of essays by Noam Chomsky about the Vietnam War and related subjects. Originally famous for his contributions to linguistics, Chomsky began writing extensively about U.S. foreign policy during the Vietnam War, and this collection is the first of his many political books. While the subject matter is a bit dated, those who are interested in either the intellectual climate during the Vietnam era or the origins of Chomsky's career as a critic of U.S. policy will find plenty to interest them in this book.

Chomsky's primary goal in American Power and the New Mandarins is not to convince the reader that the Vietnam War was wrong. On this issue, he says that "Anyone who puts a fraction of his mind to the task can construct a case [against the war] that is overwhelming" (9). Rather, his goal is to illustrate the degree to which American intellectuals supported the war, or at least the assumptions behind it. Many people remember the Vietnam War as a time of widespread protest against U.S. policy, with intellectuals and the youth leading the way. Chomsky argues that the war's "opponents" were often not concerned with the moral issues related to the war, but rather with the fact that the war seemed to be unwinnable and was costing too many American lives. The implication is that these intellectuals would not be protesting if the U.S. had crushed the Vietnamese resistance without significant loss of American life (Vietnamese life being irrelevant).

The book is made up of eight essays of varying length, and an introduction and an epilogue.

- In "Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship," Chomsky introduces the concept of the "new mandarins"--those who claim the authority to determine policy based on their allegedly "scientific" understanding of human nature and technology. These "new mandarins" believe that their knowledge gives them the right to restructure society in Vietnam and elsewhere, regardless of the wishes of the local population. In addition, Chomsky argues that many intellectuals tend to accept the status quo and support the basic assumptions of U.S. policy--that Western nations always know best, and force is justified to keep Third World countries from going down the "wrong" path. This essay is not very concise or organized; Chomsky has plenty of evidence to present but it flows out in no particular order. Chomsky devotes nearly 50 pages to criticizing a single historian's book about the Spanish Civil War--an excellent example, in Chomsky's opinion, of "the deep-seated bias of liberal historians," (93) but a cumbersome way to make his point. Still, whatever its organizational shortcomings, this essay presents plenty of evidence to illustrate the biases of liberal intellectuals in favor of American power.

- In "The Revolutionary Pacifism of A. J. Muste: On the Backgrounds of the Pacific War," Chomsky explains the parallels between the Vietnam War and Japanese expansion in China in the 1930's. In both cases, defenders of government policy appealed to "the high moral character of the intervention, the benefits it would bring to the suffering masses" (183). Both America and Japan tried to set up puppet governments to serve their interests, and responded to doubts about their actions by emphasizing the "Communist" threat (196).

- "The Logic of Withdrawal" discusses the political strength of the NLF (Vietcong) and the continuing resistance of the United States to any political settlement that might allow the Vietnamese a fair choice between the NLF and other alternatives. Chomsky ridicules the idea that an NLF political victory could pose any threat to America's survival, comparing this to the Nazis' claim that "a Jewish-Bolshevik conspiracy was threatening the survival of Germany" (249).

- "The Bitter Heritage" is Chomsky's review of Arthur Schlesinger's book of the same name. Schlesinger expresses the "liberal" view that the United States had made a tactical error by fighting a costly war, but that American motives were pure. Chomsky argues that this view represents the extreme limit of mainstream opposition to the war in the United States. The view that "the United States has no unilateral right to determine by force the course of development of the nations of the Third World" (297) is not considered to be "responsible criticism" (296).

- In "Some Thoughts on Intellectuals and the Schools" and "The Responsibility of Intellectuals," Chomsky continues his criticism of intellectuals who endorse the irresponsible use of American power.

- "On Resistance" and "Supplement to 'On Resistance'" are Chomsky's statements about how to protest the war. Chomsky argues that resistance should remain nonviolent, not only because of moral considerations, but also because violence "will surely fail, will simply frighten and alienate some who can be reached, and will further encourage the ideologists and administrators of repression" (374-5). Chomsky endorses the refusal to be drafted as an ideal means of resistance, since it directly impedes the government's ability to carry out its policies and can be used to make a visible statement as well.

If you are a Chomsky fan, you will probably enjoy this book; his writing style and basic outlook have remained consistent over the decades. He has written plenty of books and essays about more recent events, however, so if you are interested in American power in general rather than Vietnam in particular, you might want to check the newer ones out first.

During the Vietnam war the United States used its enormous military power to try to install in South Vietnam a minority government of U.S. choice, with its military operations based on the knowledge that the people there were the enemy. This country killed millions and left Vietnam (and the rest of Indochina) devastated. A Wall Street Journal report in 1997 estimated that perhaps 500,000 children in Vietnam suffer from serious birth defects resulting from the U.S. use of chemical weapons there. Seems fairly reasonable to protest against this, surely?... This was and is a groundbreaking book, and ....

This is a collection of essays from 1966 through 1968, Noam Chomsky's first political book, published in 1969 when he was fourty years old, after he had established himself as the Einstein of linguistics. Of course, it's a little bit dated but it's remarkable how little Chomsky's critique has changed, how cogent it was from its very beginning. Many of the thoughts in this book, certainly on resistance to the state, have great pertinancy today.

His target was the liberal intelligensia, the "best and the brightest." These brethren (Douglas Pike, Arthur Schlesinger Jr., Samuel Huntington, Walt Rostow, Dean Rusk, New York Times correspondent Neal Sheehan et. al), Chomsky shows quite compellingly, helped engineer and/or provided intellectual rationalization for one of the most barbaric wars in human history. These rationalizations were quite openly expressed in the newspapers, journals of opinion, congressional testimony, U.S. AID reports, and so on. They went something like this: We are fighting against the National Liberation Front, the so-called Viet Cong which enjoys great support amongst the South Vietnamese population and has received little aid from the North. The fact that it is to a large extent supported by the population is irrelevant. The NLF threaten our security. No indiginous force in South Vietnam, with the exception of the Buddhists, has any remotely comparable level of support. Therefore, since we can't compete in the political field, in 1954 we violated the Geneva agreements and set up a terror and torture regime in South Vietnam, with large numbers of American "advisors" helping, that used extreme violence to help compensate for its lack of political support. We made sure that the seventeenth parallel, intended in the Geneva accords as only a temporary demarcation line, was made permanent and sabotoged efforts to hold the elections in 1956 for national reunification called for in the accords. We're weak politically but we are unrivaled militarily and in the other resources of violence at our disposal. In the late 50's our response began to elicit a violent reaction from the NLF, the main target of our repression. Our allies are almost always the most feudal, reactionary and brutal elements of South Vietnam, who can never elicit any support amongst the general population. So we have to destroy the NLF, which means to "dislodge it from its constituency" which means we have to destroy its supporters and all of their homes, villages, natural environment, and so on, which means we have to take actions that will perhaps exterminate those supporters, the rural population of South Vietnam. We, who believe in behaviorist psychology, don't see anything wrong with what we are doing and believe it is fundamentally just and in the best interests of the people of South Vietnam who are perhaps somewhat unfit for self-government. We held "free and fair" elections that excluded any "neutralist," communist, socialist, NLF sympathizers and other such rascals from taking part.

The debate in the mainsteam on this issue was between people on the one hand like Joe Alsop on the right, who argued that if America just kept applying more and more military force i.e. tried to wipe Vietnam off the planet it could eventually prevail and on the other hand people on the "left" like Schlesinger Jr. who prayed that this policy would work yet thought it would be too costly in the long run. Chomsky expresses thoughts that would come to any remotely civilized human being upon viewing this spectacle.

Chomsky also devotes an iconoclastic, though at times somewhat ponderously written chapter to the Spanish civil war, a very good chapter on the background to Japan's role in World War Two and demolishes the establishment myths about the Cold War. He urges intellectuals to be iconoclasts, to serve truth and justice, not power and privillege.

Also of some interest is a paraphrase of a quote from Harry Truman by James Warburg that Chomsky quotes. In the first edition Chomsky attributed the quote exclusively to Truman; it was corrected and attributed to Warburg, very similar to Truman's original quote, in the second edition of the book published shortly after. If one reads any serious journal of the Social Sciences or other such fields one often finds a list of errors at the end of even favorable reviews. But the commissars jumped on it and it has been the subject of dozens of articles and hundreds of references over the years. Schlesinger in "Cycles Of American History" declared that Chomsky had fabricated the quote. It is a tribute to Chomsky that they were quite unable to address his main arguments and chose to endlessly quible over the trivial quote (one of the lesser canards about him, behind the one about his support for the Khmer Rouge and the one about his support for Robert Faurisson).

Howard Zinn has written a masterpiece. This book explodes many received untruths about the history of the US. The idea that governments act in the best interests of coorporations has a long history, Zinn goes to its foundations during the Revolution. This book needs to be on school curricula all over the world. After reading the book it is easy to see why America is war-mongering again, this time after the 'axis of evil'.

I would like to praise Zinn for an outstanding book. I am a 38 year old, self educated history student. Mr. Zinn writes with a easy cadence and is able to keep interesting stories (history) that have previously bored me to tears! I learned not only new perspective and details but used the list of references to continue my lessons. I focus on labor history and this volume is the place to start. (no matter your interest) Mr. Zinn shines a new light on History because he writes from the working class perspective. I appreciate that Mr. Zinn is so detailed while not being overwhelming. In other books the tendency to abbriviate important happenings only serves to discount the struggles of the poor while highlighting the efforts of the wealthy. I strongly encourage people to read this book. It is as enjoyable to read as any good novel and very informitive. It proves again and again that truth is more facinating than ficton.

The book is not for blind nationalists [like the 1st reviewer], who in Orwells's terms, have a remarkable ability of not seeing the atrocities committed by their own country. It is time that the silent holocaust, which has taken an enormous human toll, be revealed to humanity. People should realize that mass murderers like Kissinger are not the writers to be read when one is aiming for the truth. Zinn shows simply and beautifully how history should be written....a record of truth, no more no less.

This is perhaps the finest work of many by a leading American Indian scholar-activist of his generation. Its superiority is partly because of its comprehensive length, incorporating many of his best essays. Churchill's forte, here & elsewhere, is the power of his dununciation of injustices & genocidal practices against the Native Americans both past & present---the crimes continue even today, as do indigenous peoples' courageous resistance. I assigned parts of this work for a class in American environmental history, & it genuinely shook up the students, who were seeing our history from a radically different perspective. Sadly, those who really need to read Churchill most likely never will.

Why 4 1/2 stars? Since many of Churchill's titles reprint essays published elsewhere, there is considerable overlap with the contents of other books. Thus someone who owns, say, 4 of his works (including this one) may actually possess only 3 full books of original material. Churchill's writings are thoroughly documented, but in contrast to Vine Deloria Jr., to whom he is often compared, Churchill's style is decidedly humorless. But Deloria's sensibility is exceptional under any circumstances, & ultimately, what Churchill discusses simply isn't amusing at all---it's tragic & outrageous.

Here is a book that everyone, Indian or non-Indian, should read by tomorrow at the very latest. Ward Churchill is an extraordinarily gifted Indian (a term he prefers over "Native American" or "Aboriginal") activist whose prose cuts like a curve-bladed scalpal. Churchill doesn't want to memorialize what American society likes to think of as ancient (and therefore, best forgotten) wrongs; he wants to talk about how white society destroyed and keeps on destroying the Original People of the New World. And he isn't going to do it with quaint tales and stories. He wants you to understand that his people are dying. Right now. This very second.

This book, a collection of essays collected over the years, isn't full of the latest spiritual word from Indian Country; don't read this if you want to learn how to construct a sweat lodge "like the real Indians did." Read this book in order to learn how to be a member of the Wannabe Tribe and you will experience deep spiritual anguish as Churchill's words tear you a new exhust pipe. He doesn't care about your spiritual development; he wants you to understand that genocide is being committed even as you read these words.

Get this book. It will hurt a lot to read it, but its better than shutting your eyes to over five centuries of genocide.

Andy traded me his book for my novel, "Forever Retro Blues" at the New England Book Festival last September. Over and over, Andy is asked, "aren't you afraid?" in reference to the people Andy is telling on. But he isn't afraid to tell the truth. And he's been there--on the inside where deals are done and our lives are changed--many times for the benefit of the deal maker and not the population at large. Andy would have fit in well with our founding fathers campaigning for justice.

I heartily recommend Thibault's book. It is hard-hitting, clearly written, and commonsensical and cogent in its conclusions. Thibault is truly his own man. His views conform to no particular orthodoxy, and they shine forth in the book with an intensity borne of the deep conviction with which the author believes them. In addition, Thibault is a marvelous sleuth and detective with a keen instinct for running down a story and ascertaining the truth about it.

Since Reagan's presidency all we Americans have heard are about the "problems" caused by the labor movement. This book is a refreshing reminder of the sacrifices (sometimes, of their lives) and struggles that working people have made to better conditions for themselves and others. The spirit and zeal and commitment to each other as a "union" of equals is inspirational. Remember if it was up to the corporations we'd all be working (starting at age 12) 60-hour weeks. We can thank the labor movement for the eight-hour day, safety regulations, and minimum wage laws.

The history of the Woolworth salesgirls stirke, especially, is extremely well written and inspiring. Dana Frank makes you feel and see the interior of Woolworths in the 1930s and the conditions in which the women worked. She also makes you feel the power and joy of their struggle. A must read for anyone interested in American history.

Howard Zinn personifies the qualities that make a great historian; he is at once an activist and a chronicler, someone who knows that history is made out on the streets not behind the ivy covered walls of priviledge. This essays and interviews contained in this small book all stand as positive evidence that the common people--the dirty masses, as conservative historians would call them--are the true foundation of history.

As enlightening as this book is, it is at the same time an alarming expose on the grossly prejudiced view of history--triumphalist history as it is sometimes referred--which is all too often constructed as a justification for and an apologetic to the injustice of the past and the crimes of the future. While some hold to the presumption that history, like the law, presides in some otherworldly state of objectivity, unassailable by mere human judgement, but as Zinn points out in the essay "The Problem is Civil Obedience","The Law is not made by God, it is made by Strom Thurmond" (50). Thus, like the law, history is only as fair and objective as the people who write it.

Consequently, I would rather cast my lot with someone who worked their way through college, served in world war two and saw first hand the utter pointlessness and brutality of war, marched in the struggle for civil rights in the 60's alongside his students, and became a historian out of a desire to tell the true story of American History, warts and all, than accept the views of historians born into privilege, who never worked a day in their lives, avoided service in wars that they are all too quick to justify, and have lived their lives inside the protective walls of Harvard, Yale and Princeton. But that is precisely why so many hate Zinn and his writings, because he refuses to accept the safety of the status quo in historical inquiry, which leads to the exposure of what are often chapters in American history that many would rather forget or ignore.
There are none more indispensable to the cause of freedom and justice than those dissident voices like Howard Zinn, who despite the threats, censorship, and repression continue to tell the history of the forgotten and question the authority of America's self-appointed defenders of culture, which is nothing more than a construct of history steeped in dogma, denial and lies.

Two disks. One dedicated to telling Emma Goldman's life story, the other to the case of Sacco & Vanzetti. It's impossible to do justice to either in the space of a single, spoken-word CD, but Howard Zinn tells us enough to make it worthwhile.

These are the stories they didn't tell you in American History classes. The abuse of political activists has a long history in this country, and Zinn drives home two instances of it. If you've already read Living my Life and Prison Memoirs of an Anarchist, the Emma Goldman disk will give you little new information, but it's still fun to listen to. I hadn't read much about Sacco & Vanzetti before, but I found way too many parallels between their case and political prisoners like Mumia abu Jamal and Leonard Peltier.

Zinn is not the most dynamic speaker, but these two lectures won't put you to sleep. Well worth the time & money. I'm going to tape them so I can listen when the freeway gets clogged up.

(If you'd like to discuss this CD or review further, click on the "about me" link above & drop me an email. Thanks!)

In this collection of essays, Zinn writes about history in a way that makes it fascinating and utterly relevant to society today. The underlying theme of his writing is that of people seeking freedom and well-being, individually and in bodies, in spite of all efforts to thwart and exploit them. My only complaint about this book is that it is not unified work (like his book _A People's History of the United States_). But it's magnificent nonetheless, and can be read essay by essay. I wish Howard Zinn and Daniel Quinn (_Ishmael_) would combine their talent and insight, because I think Zinn's passion and historical understanding could benefit fantastically from Quinn's cool philosophical analysis.