Many events ranging from wars to elections have influenced American history as the American public knows today. Even though these events have been set in stone and are in-erasable from America’s past, they can be interpreted in a vast multitude of ways. There are also always two sides of a story, and one cannot fully develop an opinion on a specific topic without having knowledge that pertains to each side. With this in mind, it is only logical to apply a comparison between Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States and Larry Schweikart’s a Patriot’s History of the United States. More specifically, the difference in American foreign policy on the Vietnam War.
The Vietnam War was a long and costly war between Northern Vietnam and …show more content…
According to Zinn: “Moral judgments on the war in Vietnam does not mainly depend on the volume of our knowledge. We find indeed, that experts in each field disagree sharply on the most fundamental questions. This is because the most ethical decisions depend on the relationships in which we place facts we know” (Zinn). Based off of his material from his book and an excerpt found online, Third World Traveler, Howard Zinn’s biases come …show more content…
In his writing, he seems more traditional and text book savvy. For example, his perspective on principles of the Vietnam war are different from those of Zinn: “Vietnam differed sharply because without declaration of war, the administration lost tremendous physiological patriotic edge” … “In short, Vietnam, in almost every respect, was textbook example of how not to conduct a war. The media’s proclivities toward an open society increasingly demanded that Americans consider the communists’ point of view and questioned whether U.S. leadership had an interest in the outcome. This in turn meant that acts of defiance against the government were magnified, exaggerated, and highlighted” (Schweikart
The Vietnam War was a long and costly war between Northern Vietnam and …show more content…
According to Zinn: “Moral judgments on the war in Vietnam does not mainly depend on the volume of our knowledge. We find indeed, that experts in each field disagree sharply on the most fundamental questions. This is because the most ethical decisions depend on the relationships in which we place facts we know” (Zinn). Based off of his material from his book and an excerpt found online, Third World Traveler, Howard Zinn’s biases come …show more content…
In his writing, he seems more traditional and text book savvy. For example, his perspective on principles of the Vietnam war are different from those of Zinn: “Vietnam differed sharply because without declaration of war, the administration lost tremendous physiological patriotic edge” … “In short, Vietnam, in almost every respect, was textbook example of how not to conduct a war. The media’s proclivities toward an open society increasingly demanded that Americans consider the communists’ point of view and questioned whether U.S. leadership had an interest in the outcome. This in turn meant that acts of defiance against the government were magnified, exaggerated, and highlighted” (Schweikart