Overview of The History Wars and America at 250, with the Historian Jill Lepore
This episode of The New Yorker Radio Hour examines how Americans have remembered, argued over, and mythologized their pasts as the country approaches its 250th anniversary in 2026. Hosted by Jill Lepore, the program pairs two conversations: one with historian Beverly Gage about the mood of the 1976 bicentennial and what it reveals about national commemoration, and another with historian-journalist Jelani Cobb about today’s “history wars,” including fights over slavery, monuments, curriculum, and who gets to define American greatness.
The Bicentennial as a Mirror for America’s Mood
What the 1976 celebration felt like
Lepore revisits a little-known National Park Service film, The Birthday Party, which asked ordinary Americans what the bicentennial meant to them. The answers were mixed: some were celebratory, but many expressed skepticism, fatigue, or ambivalence.
Main ideas from Beverly Gage
Gage argues that major anniversaries are rarely “clean” or convenient moments. The bicentennial took place in the shadow of Watergate, Vietnam, and economic strain, which made patriotic celebration feel uneven and sometimes forced.
Key points:
- National anniversaries often intensify existing anxieties rather than resolve them.
- The bicentennial was already marked by arguments over commercialization and national identity.
- Americans have long worried they are living through a moment of decline, even at times of institutional continuity.
What the 1976 film suggests about public memory
The film captures a country in cultural transition:
- counterculture and environmental critique were shaping the era
- many Americans were questioning “progress”
- others wanted the anniversary to be a chance to push the country toward its ideals rather than merely celebrate its past
Gage emphasizes that anniversaries can be opportunities for reflection, critique, and civic imagination—not just pageantry.
The History Wars and the Fight Over America’s Story
Jelani Cobb on public history now
In the second half, Lepore speaks with Jelani Cobb about the current struggle over how American history is taught and displayed. He argues that the present debate is not new, but it is sharper because history has become a political battleground.
Core concerns discussed:
- efforts to soften or erase slavery and racial violence from public history
- political attacks on museums, memorials, and historical interpretation
- the tension between nationalist storytelling and historically grounded complexity
“Historical trolling” and competing narratives
Cobb describes recent government efforts to create a patriotic, selective version of history as a kind of “historical trolling,” especially in the way they elevate Columbus, providential destiny, and a triumphalist founding narrative.
Lepore and Cobb note that:
- the left has also pushed its own corrective histories
- debate over historical interpretation is normal and healthy
- the problem arises when politics tries to flatten history into propaganda
The role of historians
A major theme is the responsibility of historians in public life:
- Academic history should welcome argument and revision.
- But teachers, museums, and journalists need usable, defensible narratives.
- Historians have an obligation to support K–12 educators, who often face the hardest pressure from shifting political demands.
Cobb argues that the challenge is not to pick one permanently “correct” story, but to preserve rigorous debate while still giving people a shared civic framework.
Civic Lessons and Local Responsibility
Localism as a democratic answer
Both conversations turn toward a practical, bottom-up idea: instead of waiting for presidents or federal commissions to define America, people can build civic meaning locally.
Examples mentioned:
- community Fourth of July events
- classroom projects and neighborhood discussions
- local news and local journalism as civic glue
- community-based political participation
The takeaway is that democracy depends less on top-down spectacle than on ordinary people talking, organizing, and making meaning together.
Key Takeaways
- America’s 250th anniversary will likely be as conflicted as previous milestone years, not a neat patriotic celebration.
- The bicentennial shows that anniversaries often reflect current anxieties more than settled consensus.
- “History wars” are really fights over identity, power, and what counts as national greatness.
- Efforts to sanitize the past are unlikely to succeed because historians, educators, and institutions have already broadened public understanding.
- A healthier civic culture comes from local engagement, historical honesty, and ongoing argument—not from a single official narrative.
Notable Ideas and Phrases
- “Progress is regress” — a bicentennial-era skepticism that still feels relevant
- “Nostalgiocracy” — a phrase used to describe politics driven by longing for a selectively imagined past
- “Argument without end” — the idea that historical interpretation should remain open, rigorous, and contested
Bottom Line
This episode argues that America’s 250th anniversary should not be treated as a simple celebration of national greatness. Instead, it should be an opportunity to confront the country’s contradictions honestly, recognize how history is always politically contested, and recommit to the democratic work of telling a fuller, more inclusive story.