The Massacres of History

The Massacres of History by Howard Zinn

The Massacres of History* is a short polemical essay by historian Howard Zinn, later republished with a foreword or accompanying commentary by Marilyn B. Young, that examines the recurring pattern of mass violence committed by states against civilian populations throughout modern history. Zinn surveys episodes ranging from European colonial conquest and the extermination of indigenous peoples, through the atrocities of twentieth-century warfare—including aerial bombing campaigns such as those on Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki—to the massacres carried out in the context of the Vietnam War, such as My Lai. Rather than treating these events as isolated aberrations or the product of individual sadism, Zinn argues that mass killing of civilians is a structural and recurring feature of state power and warfare, often rationalized by nationalist ideology, wartime propaganda, and the moral distancing that modern military technology affords. Central to Zinn's argument is the claim that "massacre" should not be understood merely as an emotionally charged label applied selectively to atrocities committed by official enemies, while comparable or greater violence committed by one's own government or allies is euphemized as legitimate military necessity. He contends that the term is applied inconsistently for political purposes: killings by designated adversaries are branded massacres and used to justify further violence, while similar or larger-scale killings by the United States and its allies are described in sanitized language—"collateral damage," "pacification," or strategic bombing—that obscures their moral equivalence. Zinn traces this double standard through historical case studies, showing how governments and media construct narratives that normalize their own violence while condemning that of opponents. Zinn situates this analysis within his broader historiographical project, exemplified in *A People's History of the United States*, of writing history from the perspective of ordinary people and victims rather than from the standpoint of elites, generals, and policymakers. He is critical of triumphalist national narratives that omit or minimize the human cost borne by conquered, colonized, or bombed populations, arguing that conventional history often serves to legitimize state violence by burying it in abstraction or patriotic justification. The essay urges readers to look past official framings and to recognize the shared humanity of victims regardless of nationality or which side of a conflict inflicted the harm. Marilyn B. Young, a historian specializing in U.S. foreign relations and the Vietnam War, contributes a complementary perspective that reinforces and contextualizes Zinn's argument, particularly regarding American military conduct in Vietnam and the broader pattern of U.S. interventionism. Her involvement situates the essay within a critical tradition of American historiography that scrutinizes U.S. foreign policy and military action with the same moral rigor typically reserved for adversarial regimes. Thematically, the work is an indictment of selective moral outrage and historical amnesia. It challenges readers to apply a single, consistent ethical standard when evaluating violence, regardless of which nation or faction commits it. The piece functions less as a comprehensive historical survey than as a moral and rhetorical intervention, using historical examples as evidence for a broader argument about power, propaganda, and the politics of memory. It reflects Zinn's lifelong commitment to activist history—history written not as neutral chronicle but as a tool for exposing injustice and prompting moral reckoning with the past, particularly concerning war, empire, and the treatment of civilian populations caught within them.

By Howard Zinn · First published 1998 · Genre: Historical Essay, Historiography, Revisionist History · 2,166 words

First lines

I suppose that this essay from The Progressive is not just a reminder that there are massacres in American history which deserve to be remembered as much, or even more, than the famous Boston Massacre. It is also a commentary on how history itself is "massacred" by the omission of important, often embarrassing episodes-that is, embarrassing to those who insist that the nation's record must be kept clean, that the myth of American exceptionalism must be retained, that we are different and better than other nations.

Genres

Tags

history · violence · genocide · colonialism · imperialism · indigenous peoples · American history · war crimes · atrocities · state violence · oppression · social justice

What this Textopian page supports

The Massacres of History is listed on Textopian as an essay by Howard Zinn, dated 1998 CE.

This source record anchors work identity, reading entry points, and catalog context for checking claims about the work.

Good citation fit

More by Howard Zinn