By
Mary Grabar
| May 6, 2020
As the dead bodies in New York City, the epicenter of the pandemic, were
fork-lifted into refrigerated trucks and the stock market tanked, the political
demarcations became acuter, with disagreements even about what to call the virus—Wuhan Virus, COVID-19, Chinese Virus, etc.
Leftists, seeing an opportunity to restructure the government,
agitate for a long national
shutdown and using emergency stimulus funds for
illegal aliens and for
reparations
for “Black + Brown communities” for “redlining, environmental racism,
[and the] wealth gap.” For some, like Naomi Klein, the Gloria Steinem
Endowed Chair in Media, Culture and Feminist Studies at Rutgers
University and an admirer of Howard Zinn and the late Venezuelan
communist dictator Hugo Chavez, the unfolding tragedy offers an
opportunity to “
beat” “coronavirus capitalism.”
Many Republican governors, especially of less hard-hit states, resisted complete shutdowns. Conservatives
worried about long-term
threats to civil liberties and the economy. They criticized the hostility with which help from the Christian charity,
Samaritan’s Purse, was met, and how offers from the Remington
gun factory and an Upstate New York
nursing home went unheeded—even as Gov. Andrew Cuomo
threatened to send the National Guard to seize health care equipment from Upstate New York facilities.
Some have compared this moment to
the Pearl Harbor attack on December 7, 1941. Americans back then, even
staunch anti-interventionists, rallied round the commander-in-chief,
volunteering for military service. Today, Americans cannot agree on who
the enemy is.
Though mistakes were made here by both sides, it is now clear that the attacker was
communist China,
which lied with the help of the UN’s World Health Organization, thus
allowing the virus to spread, and persecuted and killed their own
whistleblowers, while buying up supplies from countries that were
unknowingly about to face shortages as the virus hit. Such disregard for
human life has been characteristic of communist regimes throughout history. Yet celebrities, led by Lady Gaga, are
fundraising for the World Health Organization.
The Chinese Communist Party’s “Open Letter calling for closer international cooperation in the fight against COVID-19,”
signed
by 230 parties in 100 countries, including the Communist Party USA,
proclaims that all governments should “foster the global governance
outlook of achieving shared growth through discussion and collaboration”
and that the United Nations and the World Health Organization should
lead “in global public health governance.” In a clear move to deflect
blame, it declared that all must stand “firmly against all
discriminatory comments and practices against any country, region, or
ethnic group. . . .”
On April 20, it was revealed that 42 percent of likely voters and 60 percent of Democrats
did not blame
China or the World Health Organization for the pandemic, and instead
blamed President Donald Trump. Our largest media outlets, especially
The New York Times, The Washington Post, and
Comcast/NBC, who have lucrative deals with Communist China, obscure CCP culpability in their reporting.
A disturbingly large percentage of Americans do not understand the nature of the Chinese regime. A 2019 Victims of Communism
poll
showed that only 57 percent of Generation Z and 62 percent of
millennials “believe China is a communist country and not a democratic
country” (compared to 88 percent of baby boomers and older).
But even the knowledgeable may not see this as negative.
The same VOC poll showed that more
than one in three millennials viewed communism favorably, and a rapidly
growing percentage of those under 40 are willing to vote not only
socialist but communist. This could be related to education. Generation Z
and millennials were much more likely to report getting a favorable
presentation of communism, in grades K-12 (23 and 25 percent,
respectively), and in college (36 and 37 percent).
The rising opinion of China and communism parallels the increased use
of Howard Zinn’s "A People’s History of the United States" in
classrooms. What in actuality was a bloody Soviet-led communist takeover
of China is presented by Zinn as a “movement with enormous mass
support” led by the communists at the end of World War II. Heroically,
the “Red Army, which had fought against the Japanese, now fought to oust
the corrupt dictatorship of Chiang Kai-shek, which was supported by the
United States.”
The occupation of Peking by “Chinese Communist forces” in January
1949 was a welcomed ending to the civil war. China was now “in the hands
of a revolutionary movement, the closest thing, in the long history of
that ancient country, to a people’s government, independent of outside
control.” Mao Zedong could hardly have improved upon this version!
Furthermore, this “mass movement,” a
“people’s government,” compares favorably with the United States, which
is presented as being founded as a clever scheme by a group of wealthy
white men. As Zinn describes it, “Around 1776, certain important people
in the English colonies made a discovery....They found that by creating a
nation, a symbol, a legal unity called the United States, they could
take over land, profits, and political power.” U.S. imperialism then
quashed “peoples’” communist movements around the world. CPUSA chairman
William Z. Foster described it the same way in his 1951 book, "Outline
Political History of the Americas!"
In the last year, there have been new disturbing developments. A
second public official, following an Oklahoma City Council member—a
Fairfax County school board member—took her
oath on Zinn’s book. The Smithsonian
conducted
two Zinn Education Project-sponsored teach-ins for teachers about
Christopher Columbus. In 2019, Washington, D.C. and five states
replaced Columbus Day with Indigenous People’s Day.
More and more professors assign "A
People’s History," repeating Zinn’s claim to have written history from a
different “perspective”—of the people—from the “bottom-up.” This is the
refrain of a professor who criticized Hannah Wright, a student who
wrote me this winter.
The professor told her that calling Zinn “biased”
was “offensive” because it meant “that either the author ignored
evidence that would have changed his conclusions, or he didn't bother
with evidence at all.” Those who would “criticize” Zinn’s book are the
“people who have a problem with any history book that does not seek to
stimulate a nationalist pride in America” or are “some Joe Schmoe on the
internet.” They “never provide evidence for their criticism.”
Repeating Zinn’s own boasts, she stated, “The focus of this book is
to examine the history of working class people—Native Americans, African
Americans, women, other minorities and white, poor working class
people,” not “the rich and powerful.” Claiming that such “focus” doesn’t
make Zinn’s book “biased,” she went on, “The truth does not lie
somewhere in the middle of two sets of opinions; it lies with the
evidence. Zinn provides a lot of that and his negative commentators do
not.”
I have heard many similar stories
from students. The assertion that Zinn is chronicling the history of
overlooked groups and thus offering a new historical perspective is
Zinn’s own big lie that he put forth to cover up his lies of fact,
omission, and distortion. Zinn’s “evidence” consists of plagiarized
disreputable sources, vague references, and deceptive quotations.
Hannah’s professor presents Zinn as infallible—a status no legitimate
scholar would claim. At this critical moment, it is more important than
ever to learn about what is arguably the most influential work of
communist disinformation in our country.
Mary Grabar is a resident fellow at The Alexander Hamilton Institute for the Study of Western Civilization and author of "
Debunking Howard Zinn."