1 Answer | Add Yours
In this book, Howard Zinn’s general thesis is that American history is best understood through a Marxist lens. That is, American history has typically been characterized by class conflict. Chapter 5’s main idea is in line with this general thesis. The main idea is that the Revolutionary War was fought by the poor for the sake of the rich.
Zinn argues that the people who led the Revolution were generally rich people. However, they typically were not the ones who actually fought. They were the political leaders, but they did not participate in the fighting. As Zinn says, a
…study of the Peterborough (a town in New Hampshire) contingent shows that the prominent and substantial citizens of the town had served only briefly in the war.
The elites did sometimes serve as officers in the army. When they did, they made sure to strictly enforce the distinctions between them and the more common run of people. Zinn quotes a chaplain from Massachusetts who said that, in the army,
The strictest government is taking place and great distinction is made between officers & men. Everyone is made to know his place & keep it, or be immediately tied up, and receive not one but 30 or 40 lashes.
Zinn goes on to argue that the rich tended to benefit from the war economically while the poor did not. After the war, he says, the elites set up a government that was meant to keep them in power. He says that some people claim that the Founding Fathers wanted a balanced government that took into account everyone’s interests. Zinn does not believe this. He says
In fact, they did not want a balance, except one which kept things as they were, a balance among the dominant forces at that time.
In short, the point of this chapter is that the Revolution was fought mainly by the common people but it was the rich people who were in control and who gained the most from the war.
We’ve answered 396,818 questions. We can answer yours, too.Ask a question