Analysis of Howard Zinn's Argument in his Article "Dying for the Government" In June of 2003, Howard Zinn’s “Dying for the Government” was published in “The Progressive” newspaper. He discusses the government’s claim to military victory in Iraq, and he believes that many innocent people have died for an unjust cause in that war. His claim is that soldiers died for their government, not their country. An important part of his argument is his discussion of democracy, which he says is what our country is supposed to be based on. He also brings up some history of U.S. wars and quotes Mark Twain’s statement about the invasion of the Phillipines by the United States. Even though some of his assertions lack evidence, Zinn uses authority and structure very well to make his argument effective. Some of Zinn’s assertions are a bit sketchy in his essay because there is no evidence that proves them true. One that really stands out is when he writes, “[they] died for Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld. And yes, they died for the greed of the oil cartels, for the expansion of the American empire, for the political ambitions of the President. They died to cover up the theft of the nations’ wealth to pay for the machines of death” (159). His argument may seem true to many, but he does not provide us with any evidence that these statements are accurate. He does not say where he got this information, so it may be hard for some to believe this, unless they share the same opinions as him. Another statement he makes is that “[we] have not been given in the American media (we would need to read the foreign press) a full picture of the human suffering caused by our bombing” (159). This is a very strong assertion, but he does not tell us if he... ... middle of paper ... ...ifth of whom grow up in poverty?” (161). Questions like these make his argument very strong, and they are purposely added towards the end to make the reader consider their own thoughts about them after already having been given information on the topic. It is obvious that he is against the expansion of U.S. power, and he is very passionate in his writing about it. Authority and structure make Zinn’s argument very effective, even though some of his assertions do not have much evidence. Throughout the essay, he makes it very clear how he feels about the government and war. He feels soldiers are dying for their government so the U.S. can gain more power. Towards the end of the essay, he writes, “[instead] of being feared for our military prowess, we should want to be respected for our dedication to human rights” (161). I could not have said it better myself.
Susan Brewer brilliantly illustrates the historical facts of American government propagating violence. Scrutinizing the Philippine War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War and the Iraq War the reader discovers an eerily Orwellian government manipulating her citizens instead of educating them. Brewer states, a "propaganda campaign seeks to disguise a paradoxical message: war is not a time for citizens to have an informed debate and make up their own minds even as they fight in the name of freedom to do just that." pg. 7 The Presidents of the United States and their administrations use propaganda, generation, after generation to enter into foreign wars for profit by manipulating the truth, which it is unnecessary for our government to do to her people.
...words in the world than no or yes” (130). His statement completely illuminates the themes of global injustice and global ignorance.He understands, as an English speaking native of the Congo, that cultural barriers exist between the United States and the Congo. The Prices, however, do not understand cultural differences. They believe that the United States does everything correctly and the Congo needs to change. The fact is that the culture of the Congo and the culture of the United States are completely different. Neither culture is completely right or completely wrong. They simply differ from eachother in ways that are hard for people to understand. Cultural ignorance and cultural injustice are gorwing problems in the world of the Price family and the problems will not go away without the desire to learn about differences and the ability to accept the differences.
we do not have as many. Zinn goes on and on to define what he thinks
Zinn, Howard. "The Truman Doctrine." The Truman Doctrine. N.p., n.d. Web. 06 Mar. 2014. ..
In “Historian as Citizen (1966)” Howard Zinn first codifies his views of an opinion based activist scholar in terms of a historian. The first type of historian that he introduces is the mainstream version of the historian, “traditionally, he is passive observer, one who looks for sequential patterns in the past as a guide to the future (…) but without participating himself in attempts to change the pattern or tidy the d...
complete agreement. But, the very heart of Zinn's “history” is distorted. To use the two
Zinn in his book “A People’s History of the United States,’’ handles various issues. Though the graphic novel adaptation does not cover all the details of the history of America, the author provides us with a critical view of the history of America where its leaders carry out actions independently and not for the benefit of the whole population. It also provides us with examples of atrocities that the American army committed around the world and the country’s commitment to democracy that led it to instruct its army to join the second Word War. The author therefore focuses on the positive and the negative aspect of American history in a captivating way through visual and dynamic production of historical records.
...ay from certain races, people, or women. This wouldn’t be quite as terrible, but the hypocrisy of promising rights to all, where everyone is created equal and then doing the exact opposite makes the matter worse. Women, natives, the poor, and black had to fight countless years just to be on the same level as their oppressors, with some taking much longer to gain anything close to equality. If there’s one thing that Howard Zinn’s shows us, is that America is not as great as portrayed and some of our great American heroes are quite monstrous and supports Mary Elizabeth Lease’s opinion that “this is nation of inconsistencies.”
...hat there are some people who he has been jailed with, who he has walked the streets with and those who have risked it all are the ones who paved the way for the others. In paragraph 42 he links everything together. He no longer makes it a simple issue of ethnicity. He has made it an American issue, therefore uniting all Americans together under a common cause.
Johnson wrote about the Native Americans: when the war started they fought on the British side against Americans but Britain ultimately abandoned them. Zinn wrote about the fact that the Revolution had nothing to do with the slaves, and that the elites tried to convince white males to be a part of it. When this was not enough, they tried to convince poor people by offering them incentives of social status and money. For Zinn, American elites were pushing Britain away for their own benefit which excludes the Native Americans. The Americans believed the land was theirs, not the Native Americans. Moreover, the revolution eventually led to the end of the slave trade; it was the first of many steps. It also gave Black individuals the opportunity to have a voice and stand up for themselves. The constitution at the time did not recognize women, Native Americans, slaves or poorer
“It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder,” Albert Einstein. The Vietnam War was a war that America did not need. America believed they were doing good. They believed that they were protecting the people of Vietnam. America did not realise that they were only making a bad situation worse. America stopped nothing. They didn’t stop communism; they didn’t save the people of Vietnam. America caused the number of casualties in Vietnam to increase and had their own people killed. They caused diseases and destroyed the environment with the help of Agent Orange. America sent soldiers on a mission with a result of hundreds of civilians murdered. America did not help anyone. America sent people out to murder others and to be killed in the line of duty.
There is a logical saying in society one should take to heart; that line being, “Don’t believe everything you read.” Just because a text is written and published does not means it is always accurate. Historical facts, similar to words whispered in the child’s game, “telephone,” are easily transformed into different facts, either adding or subtracting certain details from the story. James Loewen, in The Lies My Teacher Told Me, reveals how much history has been changed by textbook writes so that students studying the textbooks can understand and connect to the information. In Howard Zinn’s, People’s History of the United States, the author recounts historical tales through the point of view of the common people. Mainstream media, as proven by Loewen and Zinn, often pollutes and dilutes history to make the information sound better and more easily understood for the society.
He refers to all the immigration groups in a judgmental way. He complains about the intelligence levels of the Italians, how dirty and deceitful the Jews are, and even the immaculate cleanliness of the Chinamen. Although he does possess quite a bit of bigotry that boarders on the line of prejudice when it comes to African Americans he recognizes that they are suffering from racism and he sympathizes with th...
One of the major differences between Zinn and Johnson, rather most historical authors, is that Zinn focuses more on the common folk in the creation of the United States. For instance, in the chapter, “The Other Civil War,” Zinn focuses on the Civil War that is not commonly written about. During this time, the only topic of concern for historians was slavery, but Zinn looks at the common people. This period of time started the Industrial Revolution, and not every person was focused on the war. Thousands of immigrants were looking for work, and poor working conditions and low wages led to man...
Indeed, as prior U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld wrote when describing the war on terror, “this will be a war like none other our nation has faced.” However, these changes bring the morality of this new face of war into question, and the justification of drone use and other modern military tactics involved in the war on terror is a subject of much debate. Focusing on U.S. involvement in Yemen from 2010-2015 as part of the war on terror, this essay will argue that, while the U.S. has met most of the criteria of jus ad bellum, the methods the U.S. has employed to counter terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda have ultimately violated the principles of just war theory, even when analyzed from the perspective of modern warfare within the framework of the current global