Zinn’s chapter of PHUS “A Kind of Revolution” puts the entire idea of American war-time unity into question. The idea of a united militia against the British is clearly a dramatization of military coordination, but even worse, it’s a narrative that eliminates the class struggles that always existed. By telling a history that does not see the flaws and disagreements in a society during wartime, I believe that historiography creates a cycle of glorification of war. In my experience, the most I’ve ever learned about domestic discontent during American wars was within the scope of Vietnam counter-culture. To see that the Revolutionary War, and probably every war after that, had an extreme amount of complexities in who was fighting and why, is to reconsider important divisions in our own society. Zinn notes that the militia was not only exclusionary, but those that did join often did so with the hopes of alleviating the pressure of their low socio-economic status (Zinn 80). Furthermore, the militia men who fought back against poor treatment were violently suppressed by wealthier soldiers (Zinn 85). Unity was clearly more of an idealistic notion than a reality of the time. The idea that class tensions were so divisive that they could not be put aside to fight a (not so) common enemy speaks volumes to the climate in which our country was founded.
America exists in a militarized society, this is an unavoidable truth of our time. However, I do believe that if education focused more on the caveats and complexities of the domestic front during wartime, we might reconsider our current foreign policies and approaches to global militarization. This might be a large conclusion to draw from just this chapter about the Revolutionary War, however, this analysis of its faults on the home front can act as a micro-example of historiography’s faults in the re-telling of American wars.
I agree that the narrative of the American Revolution was dramatized to make a more patriotic and united feeling towards the independence of the United States. There were divisions outside and inside the military that is completely ignored when talking about the Revolution. People were forced into the war and when they were promised money or land they were not given anything. I also wonder how many more histories of wars may be ignoring major components that show the truths of the times they occurred.
I find it very interesting how I question the legitimacy of the upbringing of America each time I pick up this book. The myths and lies continue to stack up and deny the truth about the growth of America. I think you did a great job analyzing the flaws and damaging aspects of the myths that are past down. I like the possible solution you provided here with the education system. I think the root of many of our problems stems from false teaches in school.
I knew about the opposition to the Vietnam War and the Counter Culture. However, I never knew about the class tensions during the Revolutionary War. It was always taught to me as a unified fight against the British, although not everyone wanted to secede. I find it interesting how some of the modern wars like Vietnam and Iraq seem to have a more noted opposition than some of the past. For example, people held parties to watch Civil War battles in the beginning. Maybe this could be because of a more readily obtainable media, or a mistrust in government.