AHA, OAH, and the Art of Losing

The American Historical Association (AHA) and the Organization of American Historians (OAH) have issued yet another statement, this time in response to the executive order demanding “patriotic education” in K–12 schools. And once again, they have managed to miss the moment entirely.

This isn’t just weak. It’s feckless.

It’s the kind of hand-wringing, self-congratulatory, fundamentally unserious response that makes historians feel good about themselves while doing exactly nothing to address what’s happening. The profession is under attack, history education is being legislated into propaganda, and these organizations have responded with… a report.

Let’s be clear: This executive order isn’t a misunderstanding. It’s not a product of confusion about how history is taught. It’s not the result of policymakers failing to read AHA posts. It’s an authoritarian attempt to rewrite the past to secure power in the present.

And the AHA and OAH responded with a *defense* of history teachers.

A defense.

As if we’re in a seminar debating historiography, rather than a full-blown assault on intellectual freedom.

This is the mistake historians keep making: acting as if reasoned arguments and data are the answer to bad-faith attacks. The people pushing this order aren’t interested in truth. They don’t care about historical integrity. They want control, and they know that controlling history controls the future.

What did the AHA and OAH give them instead?

- A lecture on how history teachers are actually well-trained professionals. (*No one on the other side cares.*)

- A survey proving that most teachers aim to develop informed citizens. (*Again, the other side is not looking for evidence; they’re looking for power.*)

- A soft reassurance that real history can be patriotic too. (*Which only legitimizes the idea that history should serve patriotism in the first place.*)

And what’s missing?

- Accountability. Who’s responsible for this attack on history? Where is the demand that they be confronted, opposed, and stopped?

- Consequences. What should be done about it? Should states refuse compliance? Should lawsuits be filed? Should historians mobilize in public, not just in academic conferences?

- Recognition of reality. This isn’t a fight over how history is taught. It’s a war over who gets to define American identity.

And let’s not ignore the most absurd part of this entire statement: the attempt to claim neutrality.

“We reject the premise that it is ‘anti-American’ or ‘subversive’ to learn the full history of the United States…”

Why? Why are we even playing on that field? Who decided that “anti-American” is a legitimate accusation to defend against?

History isn’t supposed to be patriotic. It isn’t supposed to make you feel good. It isn’t supposed to “inspire civic engagement” in a way that pleases the AHA’s members and partners. It’s supposed to tell the truth.

And the truth is, the people behind this executive order aren’t afraid of “radical indoctrination.” They’re afraid of honest history. They’re afraid of what happens when people learn that the myth of American exceptionalism is just that—a myth.

So, here’s my statement, free of charge:

This executive order is an authoritarian power grab. It is an attack on democracy. It is an attempt to enforce white nationalist propaganda in public schools. It is not about patriotism. It is about control.

And the AHA and OAH, and all of the organizational signers, instead of meeting this attack with strength, have offered another polite letter, another list of professional credentials, another assurance that real historians aren’t radicals, while the people rewriting the past to justify oppression continue marching forward, unchallenged.

That’s not leadership. That’s not resistance. That’s losing.

And historians should be sick of it. So should the people whom they claim to serve: you.