Historic Sites Should Be Chosen and Judged Based on Whether They Preserve Traditional American Heritage or Push Political Activism
Source: Brenda M. Hafera. "Which American Historical Sites To Visit Before Summer Ends." August 7, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author argues that some famous American historical sites do a great job teaching real history (like Gettysburg or Independence Hall), while others have been taken over by political activism about gender and social justice instead of focusing on actual history (like Montpelier or the National Portrait Gallery). She says this matters because how these sites tell America's story will determine whether that story is preserved, distorted, or lost entirely, so she urges readers to visit the 'good' sites and be wary of the 'activist' ones.
Conclusion
Americans should visit and support historic sites that faithfully preserve and convey traditional American heritage (the 'A' rated sites), while avoiding or criticizing sites that have shifted toward political activism, particularly around social justice, gender ideology, and LGBTQ+ history (the 'B' and 'C' rated sites), because the choice of how sites present history will determine whether America's story is preserved, denigrated, or forgotten.
Premises
- The Heritage Guide to Historic Sites evaluates historic sites and grades them A, B, or C based on whether they offer informative, even-toned, historically accurate experiences versus excluding pertinent information, including irrelevant material, or engaging in political activism.
- Many top-rated ('A') sites like Independence Hall, Gettysburg, Mount Vernon, and Mark Twain's House focus on their inherent historical and cultural value and are examples of good civic education.
- Many lower-rated ('B' or 'C') sites, such as Montpelier, Monticello, and the National Portrait Gallery, neglect core historical content (e.g., exhibits on the actual historical figures) in favor of activist content around gender ideology, sexual revolution, or 'intersectional' social justice framing.
- This activist content, such as material equating LGBTQ+ rights with the civil rights movement or provocative prompts asking children to 'imagine the aggressor' in slavery, represents a departure from historical education toward ideological advocacy.
- Private funders, especially the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Ford Foundation, are major drivers of this activist shift, donating millions to prominent sites and funding research initiatives centered on gender, sexuality, and social justice framing.
- Historic sites serve a vital civic function: they educate multiple generations, foster shared national memory, and counteract declining civic literacy in an era of screen-based isolation.
- The way historic sites present American history will determine whether the American story is preserved, denigrated, or forgotten altogether.
Assumptions
- There is an objective, largely agreed-upon 'traditional' American story/heritage that sites should convey.
- Content related to LGBTQ+ history, gender ideology, or social justice framing is inherently 'activism' rather than legitimate historical inquiry or an accurate reflection of civil rights history.
- The Heritage Foundation's guide and its historian/evaluator panel apply neutral, unbiased criteria in assigning grades rather than reflecting their own ideological priors.
- Government and private funding that supports 'B' or 'C' rated content is inappropriate or harmful, implying funders should not support sites that broaden historical narratives.
- Civic literacy and national unity depend on a singular, less contested narrative of American history rather than one that incorporates multiple historical perspectives, including marginalized groups' experiences.
- The comparison between LGBTQ+ rights history and the civil rights movement is inherently illegitimate or inappropriate, rather than a valid historical parallel some historians draw.