Parks and Recreation Programs Serve as Political Messaging Tools, Study Finds

In a move that has sparked controversy, the Trump administration has initiated a sweeping directive requiring the National Park Service to remove exhibits and literature deemed to “inappropriately disparage Americans,” with a compliance deadline of September 17. The March executive order targets content in gift shops and museums across national park properties that presents critical perspectives on American history.

Reports indicate that parks have already begun removing exhibits explaining Indigenous land stewardship in Muir Woods, information about climate change, and numerous items related to the atrocities of slavery. Among the targeted materials is the historic 1863 photograph known as “The Scourged Back,” which shows a formerly enslaved man with extensive scarring from whippings.

The directive also impacts exhibits related to slavery at the Harpers Ferry National Historic Site, which document John Brown’s historical raid, and signage that critically examines “Lost Cause” narratives that glorified the Confederacy and downplayed slavery’s central role in the Civil War.

Political analysts note that this effort aligns with President Trump’s “Make America Great Again” messaging, which premises itself on restoring a supposedly idyllic American past. Critics argue that this narrative deliberately obscures the historical experiences of Indigenous peoples, Black Americans, and other marginalized groups for whom American history has included systematic oppression.

“One feature of authoritarian populism is the need to have enemies and to have some social group to blame,” noted Justice Luís Barroso of Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court. “As we have seen recently, the blame now is diversity—diversity has become the ’cause of accidents.'”

The scope of these changes is significant, affecting the 331 million annual recreational visits to national parks. With approximately 10 percent of surveyed visitors being international tourists, the narratives presented at these sites shape both domestic and global perceptions of American history.

The administration’s approach contrasts with how other nations have addressed difficult historical periods. While Germany has directly confronted its Nazi past through museums and monuments condemning the Holocaust, Trump’s directive more closely resembles Japan’s controversial minimization of World War II atrocities in educational materials.

Political observers suggest that by targeting the Department of the Interior, which oversees the National Park Service, Trump exercises direct executive control in ways not possible with institutions like the Smithsonian or public education systems. The president has reportedly pushed for the Smithsonian to emphasize American “greatness” over what he characterizes as excessive focus on “how bad slavery was.”

This effort parallels other recent statements by the president, including his Juneteenth comment lamenting “too many non-working holidays” while simultaneously promising to “bring Columbus Day back from the ashes,” rejecting Indigenous perspectives in favor of celebrating Christopher Columbus.

Critics argue that these actions represent an attempt to reshape national identity by controlling government speech and public historical narratives. They point to initiatives like the Equal Justice Initiative’s Community Remembrance Project as alternative models for confronting difficult historical truths through documenting racial violence and honoring victims in public spaces.

Historians and civil rights advocates warn that whitewashing national park exhibits represents more than a dispute over museum text—it reflects a broader struggle over who defines American identity and how the nation confronts its complex past. While the administration frames these changes as “restoring truth and sanity to American history,” opponents argue they instead conceal documented historical facts that contradict preferred political narratives.

As the September 17 deadline approaches, the controversy highlights ongoing tensions between competing visions of American history and identity, with national parks becoming an unexpected battleground in this cultural and political conflict.