While twiddling my thumbs and toes, Howard Zinn entered my mind for some reason. I never really understood how popular he got. Then again, so is Ashlee Simpson. So.
I read snippets of A People's History of the United States and remember not being terribly impressed. Just another piece of work that will be forgotten I thought. I was 16 and so terribly wrong. Like Michael Moore movies being showcased as though they are the works of an intellectual dissident that is opening the eyes of a dead citizenry, Zinn is apparently a key text book for history classes in the United States.
To me, it's all copy and paste (and edit) historiography. I could be wrong, but behind the sexiness all we get is revisionism.
Some will always say the ends justify the means. They are raising "issues" that people refuse to discuss. That we should keep an "open mind." This means absolutely nothing to me. Such arguments are hollow. What good is to have an open mind if you can't critically assess what is being thrown at you?
Maybe what they raise has some merit on some levels. However, whatever currency it may have is completely obliterated the minute they suspend intellectual honesty. The process you employ to build your case is every bit as integral to your final conclusions.
The conditions in contemporary social and global life has made anti-Americanism the new pink and it comes as no surprise Zinn is considered an intellectual hero to many who tend to sway this way.
Personally, I think it's all fleeting intellectualism but hey I'm just a blogger.
Nonetheless, I decided to spend some time getting to know Zinn better and no sooner than I began this rapprochement did I land on an interesting site. The New Criterion has this to say about Zinn.
Here's another from The Atlantic.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.