Columbus The Indians And Human Progress By Howard Zinn

Within "A People's History of the United States" Howard Zinn wrote a chapter about Columbus, his successors, the genocide of Indians, and the history behind the United States called "Columbus, the Indians, and Human Progress". Zinn wrote this chapter to make the readers aware of how Americans justify atrocities, such as what Columbus did to the Indians, because what he did "helped", in a sense, make what America is today. Zinn's point is that today in American society, we celebrate corrupt happenings in the name of the United States. Zinn identifies that "when we read the history books given to children in the United States, it all starts with heroic adventures—there is no bloodshed—and Colombus Day is a celebration" (7). Well, why do we celebrate

Not at all. This is what fails to be mentioned throughout text books and curriculums in the United States for students K-12. Columbus completely wiped out the Arawak Indians. He treated them so poorly to the point where the Arawaks tried to save themselves. "Among the Arawaks, mass suicide began, with cassava poison. Infants were killed to save them from the Spaniards" (4). The Arawaks were maimed and murdered by Colombus, and to save themselves and their children from going through this, the only way out was suicide. Americans celebrate the fact that Colombus discovered America, but ignore what he did to the Indians. It is pushed off to the side, because well, if Columbus did not "accidentally" come to America and kill all those Indians, then there would have not been any progress. Zinn argues throughout this chapter that if Americans justify the genocide of the Indians, then what other atrocities would be justified in the name of the United States and

And that view is within the powerful and the wealthy. Zinn clearly states that: "I prefer to try to tell the story of thr discovery of America from the viewpoints of the Arawaks..." (10). Histories are told and taught from the point of view of the wealthy and powerful and this histories within themselves, are biased. Zinn mentions Henry Kissinger and his book A World Restored, "...in which he proceeded to tell the history of nineteenth-century Europe from the viewpoint of the leaders of Austria and England, ignoring the millions who suffered..." (9). In this book Kissinger talks about a "peace" that was "restored", when there was no peace at all for people of the lower classes. Suffering is ignored and only heroism is emphasized. Why? Because these histories are written and told by the wealthy, not by the people who are undergoing chaos in their world. This is the practice of history that Zinn addresses. That atrocities are buried in textbooks by other information about success and progress. "...the quiet acceptance of conquest and murder in the name of progress—is only one aspect of a certain approach to history, in which, the past is told from the point of view of governments, conquerors, diplomats, leaders" (9). All of history is told from the people who are not the ones suffering and the voices of those who are suffering, gets buried. It is seen as not important, because if these people did not suffer