526
HOWARD ZINN
opher to stop merely interpreting the world, but to change it,
as
a phi–
losopher. not
in
some quick-change role as citizen.) Williams distin–
guished between "the meaning" of the past, which he
says
the historian
can offer, and "what to do about the meaning" which "is not a ques–
tion that the historian qua historian can answer," but presumably can
be
answered as the historian switches quickly to his role as citizen. He
admits it is hard to keep the roles separate but "the effort must
be
made" if the historian "is to offer anything of value" to anyone.
He then proceeds to tell us, in his final pages, the "three primary
meanings" of his research: that the marketplace outlook of "the agri–
cultural majority," mixing profit freedom and personal freedom, "pro–
vided the dynamic causal force for a steady movement by the majority
toward an imperial foreign policy"; that the metropolitan minority ac–
cepted this outlook while consolidating their control of the political econ–
omy, leading to "a war against Spain and the formulation of a grand
strategy for such imperial expansion of the free Amer:can marketplace";
that farm businessmen and metropolitan leaders both failed "to main–
tain an operating balance between the expansion of freedom and the
expansion of the marketplace," the result being "an overpowering
im–
perial consensus that defined freedom in terms of what existed in
America."
Williams then says: "Those meanings that I offer as a historian
do not, however, tell me what to do as a citizen." By asking the impos–
sible of history - "what to do" - Williams dodges the possible: expos–
ing that in the past which in some way leads the reader to
want
to do
something. By separating the historian's work from the citizen's con–
cerns, he ends up with "meanings" which fly off into space, aimed at
questions of professional interest only. He has told us he is interested
in "changing those ideas and policies" which have brought our present
crisis in foreign affairs, but for this his "meanings" are academic and
empty.
Then, turning to "questions for me as a citizen and for other citizens
as citizens" he asks: is marketplace freedom a limiting concept of free–
dom? and do its actual operations limit real freedom even more stringent–
ly than the conceptual limitations suggest?
If
they do, even to some ex–
tent, what kind of changes, reformist or revolutionary, will be necessary?
These are important questions, but they do not arise from the research
in this book, nor does the book aim at answering them.
Here we have the common condition of the professional historian
who cares about the world: he starts off with a strong indignation
against a particular social evil he wants to eliminate, and muses vaguely
about writing history that will help; he then plunges into historical
re-
