If you would actually read any of Zinn's work you would find that he doesn't make any of the claims that you say he lies about. Simply he paints a fuller picture of why people are immigrating to the US. Tell me one simple fact that Zinn has lied about. The guy was a history professor, I am sure if he was doctoring the truth he would have lost his job, and been discredited.
He's dead. Here. Read some professors who think he's dishonest. Discredited!? That would be an understatement.
https://newrepublic.com/article/112574/howard-zinns-influential-mutilations-american-history
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324769704579008453713889352
What sort of history do you think he wrote?
Zinn said of history: (
http://godfatherpolitics.com/white-guilt-common-core-howard-zinn/)
“Objectivity is impossible, and it is also undesirable. That is, if it were possible it would be undesirable, because if you have any kind of social aim, if you think history should serve society in some way; should serve the progress of the human race; should serve justice in some way, then it requires that you make your selection on the basis of what you think will advance causes of humanity.”
Truth had no place in his world:
He called communist China, under Mao’s reign of terror, “the closest thing to a People’s government,” and that “Castro’s Cuba had no bloody record of suppression.” So I guess when Mao had 60 million of his own citizens slaughtered he was doing “the people’s work”? Do I have that right? And when Castro enlisted Che Guevara and his death squad, that wasn’t bloody suppression?
But what of America and the founders? Zinn’s view: “Forget about all men are created equal, forget about liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, America’s founding can be reduced to the pursuit of exploitation and profit.”
Zinn portrays the American founding as a virtually totalitarian system of oppression. Interestingly, Zinn never felt the need to explain the dichotomy of his view of the founding with the Constitution, guaranteeing “individual rights” and government “balance of powers.” I guess that was all just a smokescreen, a ruse created by the “Ruling Class” to fool the people.
I could go on, describing just how damaging Zinn’s “version” of history is to our children but I think you have the gist of it.
http://practicallyhistorical.net/tag/howard-zinn/
"He offers no research of his own, merely citing the work of others- to mock it with his unsubstantiated drivel."
http://reason.com/archives/2010/02/03/the-peoples-historian
Reviewing
A People's History in
The American Scholar, Harvard University professor Oscar Handlin denounced "the deranged quality of his fairy tale, in which the incidents are made to fit the legend, no matter how intractable the evidence of American history." Socialist historian
Michael Kazin judged Zinn's most famous work "bad history, albeit gilded with virtuous intentions
Try this:
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/4370
Or this:
http://www.bu.edu/today/2011/rethinking-howard-zinn/
“Today,” he said, “you don’t see the kind of very polemical history that is based on one’s man’s goal of making change, not just objectively reporting history, but rather affecting and influencing history.”
Discredited? Over, and over. Simply put--
rhetoric!
