Revisionist history is defined as the reinterpretation of established historical narratives, challenging traditional viewpoints through new evidence, methodologies, or perspectives (Fiveable Content Team). Often aimed at filling in gaps left by previous understandings of history, it is based on the action against traditionally accepted narratives. The act of engaging in revision to history can both be positive and negative (Fiveable Content Team). At times, it is necessary to revise a previous narrative due to new evidence suggesting new truths. Correcting previous errors and introducing new ideas can uplift marginalized voices in ways that give them the recognition they have long been denied. Revising history can also be a dangerous act when not based on fact. Specifically, it can be used to rewrite narratives to support a specific ideological or political agenda, sometimes to the detriment of accuracy (Fiveable Content Team).
The U.S. has a history that involves a number of perspectives that are increasingly developing and changing based on new evidence and nuanced understandings. To honor this history, the U.S. government funds institutions such as the Smithsonian. Established by Congress in 1846 as a “trust instrumentality” of the United States, the Smithsonian’s mission is to “increase and diffuse knowledge” (Smithsonian). The institution serves as a center for preserving and interpreting American history and culture, which the government supports as a public service (Smithsonian). In keeping with this admission, all Smithsonian museums are free. Truly, the final harborers of the American legacy, they have a responsibility to the people to preserve and protect history.
It is when political interest is taken in this preservation of history that questions of revision arise. In March of 2025 president Trump issued an executive order titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History.” In this order, he lays out his grievances about how American history has been framed:
“Over the past decade, Americans have witnessed a concerted and widespread effort to rewrite our Nation’s history, replacing objective facts with a distorted narrative driven by ideology rather than truth. This revisionist movement seeks to undermine the remarkable achievements of the United States by casting its founding principles and historical milestones in a negative light. Under this historical revision, our Nation’s unparalleled legacy of advancing liberty, individual rights, and human happiness is reconstructed as inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed” (Trump).
Trump concretely acknowledges his own ideology as one that prioritizes American exceptionalism. American exceptionalism, being the idea that the U.S. is inherently unique and superior to other nations, he clearly communicates this belief through using language such as “remarkable” and “unparalleled”. Along with his outlined desire to enforce his ideology, Trump also demonstrates his desire to eliminate other narratives that include a more critical lens of American history. Specifically defining how people should engage with history, he states that no one should have to be subjected to “divisive narratives” showing how he feels the public is being led against his ideological beliefs.
Outlining what he sees as the issue with our current documentation of history, Trump concludes the order with a plan of action.
“To advance this policy, we will restore the Smithsonian Institution to its rightful place as a symbol of inspiration and American greatness –- igniting the imagination of young minds, honoring the richness of American history and innovation, and instilling pride in the hearts of all Americans…The Secretary of the Interior shall: take action, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to ensure that all public monuments, memorials, statues, markers, or similar properties within the Department of the Interior’s jurisdiction do not contain descriptions, depictions, or other content that inappropriately disparage Americans past or living (including persons living in colonial times), and instead focus on the greatness of the achievements and progress of the American people” (Trump).
In this conclusion, Trump reveals that he will be enforcing his ideology through executive action. Showing how he will get the general public to follow his ideological beliefs about American history, he specifically calls on the Secretary of the Interior to execute this action. The Department of the Interior is part of the executive branch, so by further granting it power to enforce his conservative agenda, he is not only advancing his own ideology but building up the executive branch to do so. Overall, through this executive order, Trump shows how he will further enforce the conservative ideology he holds, revealing his agenda, thats main outcome is a more conservative narrative in public discourse.
Under this executive order, President Trump has taken recent action to revise history to align with his own conservative ideology. This past January, informational signage about slavery was removed from the President’s House in Old City Philadelphia (Crawford). Once the home of Presidents George Washington and John Adams, the site is now operated as a museum by the National Park Service. The signs removed memorialized the nine enslaved individuals who were held there against their will by President Washington and his wife, Martha. These signs were removed in alignment with President Trump’s executive order Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History (Crawford).
In response to this action, the city of Philadelphia sued the park service, arguing it violated a cooperative agreement for the site’s development(Russell-Sluchansky). U.S. District Court Judge Cynthia Rufe ruled in the city’s favor. The Trump administration said it will appeal this ruling, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of the Interior stating, “the National Park Service routinely updates exhibits across the park system to ensure historical accuracy and completeness,” (Russell-Sluchansky) The spokesperson additionally reiterated that the agency believes it has legal and historical authority to unilaterally change exhibits across the country, regardless of agreements with local jurisdictions (Russell-Sluchansky).
Through this first act of “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” we can see how Trump is attempting to control the narrative of American legacy to align with his conservative ideology. Ordering the removal of slavery signage without the approval of any of the other branches of government prevented a whole part of American history from being represented at this location. This revision of the narrative that is produced by this landmark reflects a more conservative ideology that aligns with President Trump’s. By advancing his own ideology in this way, President Trump has effectively limited discourse that contradicts his conservative narrative for the U.S.
While signs were placed back after action was taken against President Trump, his administration’s appeal to this ruling shows that they are not willing to compromise. Their goal of revision is absolute, no exhibit left untouched. This action also indicated that this will not be a one-time offence. His commitment to furthering a conservative narrative in the U.S., even with judicial rulings against his actions show his motivation to revise american history.
American history should no doubt be celebrated. The development, the success, and the loss are all parts of America’s truly exceptional legacy. To ignore even the ugliest of truths of its history is to compromise the legacy America holds. If President Trump wanted to truly honor American exceptionalism, he would not inflict his own ideology onto interpretation, he would not remove signs that recognize real parts of American history, and he would not limit the right to express an understanding of history contradictory to his own. By defining how citizens can learn and understand history, President Trump is pushing his own ideology onto the past. Americans should be able to pursue a full understanding of history without ideological blinders. As Trump continues on this trajectory of revision without definite limitation, I am left asking the question: How far is too far?
Works Cited
Crawford, Liz. “Slavery displays removed from Philadelphia historical site after Trump directive.” CBS News, 23 January 2026, https://www.cbsnews.com/philadelphia/news/presidents-house-independence-mall-slavery-trump/. Accessed 19 February 2026.
Fiveable Content Team. “Revisionist history.” Fiveable, 2025, https://fiveable.me/key-terms/introduction-archaeology/revisionist-history. Accessed 19 February 2026.
Russell-Sluchansky, Carmen. “Trump administration to appeal ruling restoring slavery exhibit at Philadelphia’s President’s House Site.” WHYY, 2026, https://whyy.org/articles/presidents-house-site-slavery-exhibit-appeal/. Accessed 19 February 2026.
Smithsonian. “Legal History.” Smithsonian Institution, 2026, https://www.si.edu/ogc/legalhistory. Accessed 19 February 2026.
Trump, Donald J. “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History – The White House.” The White House, 27 March 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/restoring-truth-and-sanity-to-american-history/. Accessed 19 February 2026.
