Zinn describes in this chapter, The Coming Revolt of the Guard, an idealization of the results of revolution for those not represented yet in America, based on glimpses of historical revolution in the past. He described the increasing divide between the wealthy and the poor in the United States and explained that this country was created with so many natural resources, talent, wealth, and labor power, that it can afford to give up a little bit of freedom to those dissenting or not pleased. He also stated that this nation was created with the sole intent of keeping 99% of the population down and against each other, which is partly true. Infighting is the main way to keep people distracted from their real issues and grievances, like safety, health, housing, poverty, food, but I do not think this entire government structure of the United States was created with this intent, but instead has transformed itself into a distraction as a result of the intervention of external influences. Zinn also agrees from his beginning chapter’s that the Founding Fathers, although they had immense wealth and racist attitudes, developed the colonies into the states that they are today, which was the start (or end, depending on how one views it) of their own revolution. What began the delusion is the intervention of American businesses and international influences into American policies, but I think Zinn would argue that the very structure of almost any government in the world should expect revolution as they are based on an unequal structure rather than “false socialism”.
History and media should show everyone who is making small rebellion actions every day, and large actions too, as it would allow people to see that they can make change. Histories understate revolts because they do not occur often, but they should continue to highlight the importance of revolt as a means for change, but not forget to overemphasize statesmanship as it is what we rely on for everyday function. Statesmanship includes, but is not limited to, voting for representation, caring for your neighbor, participating in your community, participating in understanding, and more. Statesmanship is not a requirement but is a commitment to improving the country through smaller victories, as these tasks can be arduous at times, which is a continuous protest to the brutality of the state of the human condition.
You mention an interesting point about the Founding Fathers of the U.S.A. I think that we sometimes forget that they created the American government in a much more democratic way than the monarchial rule in England many were unsatisfied with. Nevertheless, I concur with Zinn that despite the other influences that comprise our government system’s structures today, the elite and powerful have always wanted their interests to be served first before anyone else’s.
I agree with your take on Zinn’s chapter. I think the reason that Zinn’s opinion is a little unreasonable is that the people who are in power are never willing to completely change the system that they hold power in. The movement needs to start entirely in the grassroots and rise up without the help of anyone in power. As we have learned, it is very hard to rally a mass group[ to work as a unit without a leader so it would be challenging to find a leader from the people fit for the task.
I completely agree with your opinions on this chapter. Also, I believe that Zinn goes a bit overboard in his claims that the government was set up to keep 99% of the American population down. That narrative is actually one that is most offensive to me as America is the one nation that allows people to pursue the American dream, and break the cycle of poverty through hard work, proper decision making, and the tiniest bit of luck. Zinn’s claim about 99% also does not make sense given that the largest population of people based off of economics is the middle class. Overall, I agree with your take completely and find Zinn’s arguments to be quite offputting.
You made some really good points .I absolutely agree that history needs to recognize the power that our revolts and protests have to make change for the country. When history books don’t fully delve into this, do you think that it is intentional? The elite and powerful always want to secure there needs, and they have the power to produce the history materials that we study, with there own narrative and points of focus.