Park Rangers who disagree with the new ideology are retiring, while younger rangers adopt the talking points to advance their careers.
The National Park Service is among the vanishingly small group of federal agencies that have managed to maintain widespread popularity across American society in our age of polarization. But determined progressives within the service are in danger of squandering that reputation in favor of promoting a revisionist view of American history.
Veteran National Park rangers at Independence National Historical Park (NHP) in Philadelphia have long understood their role to be the promotion of America’s heritage. That understanding was upended when their bosses partnered with a left-wing activist group that seeks to reframe Americans’ understanding of their own history.
Historical interpreters at NHP are tasked with explaining the significance of countless National Parks-administered buildings — Independence Hall, Old City Hall, Congress Hall, and the Benjamin Franklin Museum, among others — to eager visitors.
In February 2023, ICSC hosted an “Inclusive Story Telling” training session that NHP rangers were required to attend, urging them to adopt a more progressive reading of the landmarks. The trainings were led by representatives of the International Coalition for Sites of Conscience, a nonprofit that works with museums and other protected sites to infuse social-justice messaging into their public presentations.
Recorded training modules obtained by National Review reveal the thrust of ICSC’s engagement with rank-and-file Independence NHP staff.
In one lesson titled, “Context and Story,” the instructor argues that the racial identity of all park rangers should affect how they convey historical information about the sites they oversee, undermining the traditional view that the promotion of American history should unite all Americans irrespective of race, color, or creed.
“Think about yourself,” the host asked the attendees. “Take a moment and . . . reflect where within a power spectrum you think you fit . . .”
“Identities often settle along power spectrums. . . . Our society . . . privileges whites over other ethnic identities,” she continued.
The closing slide urges the group to contemplate a variety of questions for their tours, including whose voice is omitted from or silenced by a given display; who is at the “center” of the story; how a visitor’s experience would differ if the answers to either of the aforementioned questions were altered; and what it means to “shift the power in a story”.
One of the rangers wrote an anonymous letter, later published by the National Association of Scholars, detailing the event:
It was all about “re-framing” the tours at Independence Hall to include stories about “people that have been left out of the story” of our Founding. Apparently, this includes “indigenous people, women, the working class, Loyalists [to the King], fence-sitters, enslaved people [we aren’t allowed to say “slaves” anymore], free African Americans, the common soldier, non-English speaking people, international participants, non-Christians, political dissidents, and [drumroll . . . ] LGBTQ.”
As it happens, the tours are only twenty minutes long. The presenter said, “You could easily cut twenty percent of what you say now.” Who and what will be cut? Washington, Adams, Franklin?
Although park staff were not required to incorporate these new talking points into daily interactions with visitors, some felt pressured to acquiesce, according to the letter’s author. Rangers were encouraged to sign up as “early adapters” by the ICSC facilitator. These adapters vowed to be pioneers in this revisionist movement, pledging to inject the group’s message into their tours.
Some staff believe this new ideological push could be fueling a drawn-out exodus of veteran rangers.
“A lot of retirements have taken place, I think because they don’t like the direction in which the NPS is going now,” one ranger said. “I think it’s had a definite impact.” They estimate that about one-third of the older rangers find ICSC’s mission ridiculous but that the others are willing to go along with it due to union pressure, raw ambition, or a genuine affinity for left-wing interpretations of history.
The younger rangers seem especially vulnerable to these pressures.
“You know . . . I don’t think they have much of a problem with it,” the ranger said. “I hate to say it, but I think we traditionalists are in a definite minority.” The letter’s author was stunned when one of the younger “early adapters” justified his decision to parrot ICSC’s talking points by simply saying, “I want to get promoted.”
The ICSC mission seems to stand in direct opposition to the understanding longtime rangers have of their role and responsibility.
“There still remains a need to dismantle its [transitional justice] Western foundations and interrogate the institutional racism that has permeated human rights and international justice systems from their inception,” ICSC’s 2023 Global Initiative for Justice, Truth & Reconciliation reads.
“So here we are, [at] the birthplace of the United States, where the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were debated and created inside, and they invited a group that literally wants to destroy everything that was created,” one Independence Park ranger told NR.
“I don’t think they understand it’s self-destruction, because if you focus on [a] neo-Marxist interpretation, where Western society basically has to be dismantled . . . that means Independence National Historical Park needs to be bulldozed, right? That’s essentially what it conveys.”
The most troubling moment for this ranger came when the ICSC instructor insisted on cutting core content from the already fleeting 20-minute-long tours in favor of discussing “women, Native Americans, and African Americans.” Worse yet, the instructor directed rangers to directly contact them if any park supervisors took issue with the implementation of this new protocol, implying a level of authority over the site’s operations previously unbeknownst to the rangers.
“Look, it’s [obviously] not a shock,” one ranger said. “Since 2021, you’ve had the Biden administration in office, and yes, they’re going to appoint a secretary of the interior [who’s] going to push their ideologies. And so, it’s not a surprise that there is this trickle effect into our divisions from up above.”
“You know, to be honest, having worked through the Trump administration, it was really just kind of hands-off,” they added.”
The ICSC declined to comment on the specific concerns expressed by the rangers.
“The International Coalition of Sites of Conscience is honored to support the National Park Service, including its many National Historic Sites, in providing educational and inspiring spaces where all Americans can connect with their history and reflect upon our shared heritage,” an ICSC representative said in a statement.
The National Parks Service did not respond to a request for comment.
National Review has been made aware of at least two rangers who were forced to appear before what amounts to a professional tribunal for merely pushing back during the training session. Though disconcerting, no serious disciplinary actions were carried out against them.
When asked if they fear for the future of historical interpretation across NPS, one ranger’s response was emphatic. “I do. I absolutely do.”
“There will be younger generations that are new hires and unless they have their own personal views, many of them will say, ‘Okay, I want to get promoted. I want to have a career. I’m just going to play the same song that they want me to play.’ And I think it is something that will continue.”
One ranger emphasized that the training session seemed to have been an anomaly and no further ideological messaging has been introduced at Independence NHP since. However, NPS recently boasted of “[holding] a workshop with the Sites of Conscience and our southern Arizona partners to learn how to tell more inclusive stories, form new partnerships, and connect through personal experiences” as late as March of this year.