The People's History

Zinn's book was a long read. The is substantial in both shear number of pages and in the amount of information packed in between the covers. Because I was reading it during a presidential election cycle between an explicitly corporate man and a centrist made it even more difficult.
Zinn's writing is ponderous. He clearly has a message and never misses an opportunity to bludgeon the reader with it. The research, secondary, and primary sources, are prodigious and drives home the point like a sledgehammer.
Despite the writing, I forged through because I found the story Zinn was telling compelling. It is true that the victors write the history, so when the losers get a chance it is a troubling treat. As part of the mollified middle class, it is disheartening to be reminded that my happiness is a well constructed myth and that in many ways I, along with my peers, have been duped, and are in league with, the rapacious captains of capitalism.
Reading the book I moved between feeling angry and despondent-mostly despondent. I thought that perhaps the best way to effect change was to vote for Romeny and accelerate the rapid decimation of the middle class. I also thought that despite the fact that Obama was part of the grand compromise that kept the existing balance in place, it was better than the pain of revolution. I eventually found a balance by accepting that Zinn and his ilk present a false choice.
It is not the case that the current balance is fundamentally flawed and that it needs to be torn down. The current balance is still weighted towards the haves, and is arguably getting more lopsided, but it is far better than many systems. Revolution will not get us any closer to a healthy balance; it will only get us further away. That doesn't mean we accept the balance. The answer is constant vigilance and never accepting the status quo.