Zinn: Communist Treason Taught at Taxpayer Expense

Multimillionaire Matt Damon and his Hollywood cronies have been pushing the book A Peoples History of the United States on American youth since the Academy Award winning film GoodWill Hunting. Many schools have adopted the book and taught it as Gospel to impressionable kids- all at taxpayer expense. John Anderson writing at Youth for Western Civilization  has uncovered what the managed media is covering up:

"Recently released FBI documents have revealed that Howard Zinn, author of an anti-American 'history' book which is imposed on millions of students across the country, was a longtime member of the Communist Party and viewed as a security threat. The 'Communist Party USA' was controlled and funded by the Soviet Union, and Zinn was one of its primary conduits of ideology into the American 'progressive' movement through his teaching position at Boston University from 1964 to 1968, and most importantly through his book 'A Peoples' History of the United States'.
'A Peoples' History of the United States' portrays the history of the United States in classic Marxist terms. The book glorifies feminism and the 'class struggle', and vilifies the United States as a 'racist', 'imperialist', 'sexist' and 'oppressive' nation.
Even liberal commentators have admitted that the book is more propaganda than history. Matthew Yglesias, while saying that the book “provokes useful inquiry,” conceded that “that the People’s History is neither good history nor good politics, offering basically nothing in terms of ways to think about solutions to the problems of the world.” More worrisome, he notes that the book has been universally read and consumed by the liberal elites: “most of the best people seem to have read it at some point, and all that’s a pretty impressive achievement.” Scott Eric Kaufman, a fan of the book, reported that Zinn told him “My little book has served its purpose.”
A film called “The People Speak,” which was based on his book, was shown on the History Channel, and featured a panoply of mainstream actors and 'progressives'. Even liberal reviewers such as Tom Shales of the Washington Post found the film “heavy-handed and agitproppy” and “a shopping list of grievances through the years.”...
the FBI described him in a breifing to the Secret Service as late as 1972 as “potentially dangerous” for a number of reasons including his involvement in groups “engaged in activities inimical to [the] U.S.”


 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments
  • No comments exist for this post.
Leave a comment

Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Name

 Email (will not be published)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.