In April we celebrated the 250th anniversary of the “shot heard round the world.” It served as a wake-up call, if a faint one, for preparations for our nation’s 250th birthday on Jul. 4, 2026.
Most of us surely sense that forgetfulness is not our main problem when it comes to celebrating this milestone. Rather there is a deep ambivalence about how to think about our country — and our obligations as we approach this landmark year.
Where does this ambivalence come from? Historian Allen Guelzo chalks it up to “the polarization and cynicism of these times” which is surely true. Both left and right play their part in this as Guelzo notes. But the anniversary presents a special challenge for the left. As historian Beverly Gage has noted, for progressives “rejecting traditional patriotism has become de rigeur: By kneeling for the national anthem, dismissing the Founders as enslavers, and expressing unease at the prospect of flying an American flag.”
Even for those on the left who are more comfortable with flag-flying, they prefer to think of American patriotism as a question—“a conversation about what, if anything, makes America great,” as Gage would put it.
This contrasts sharply with President Trump’s recent executive order on patriotic education. No ambivalence there — patriotic education includes “the concept that celebration of America’s greatness and history is proper.” A question mark is thus met with an exclamation point.
And yet both perspectives on America are required if we are to foster greater unity and shared purpose among Americans across the political spectrum in the upcoming year. The path will not be an easy one.
James Davison Hunter’s recent book “Democracy and Solidarity” helps us understand how deep our polarization goes. Whereas we used to be able to draw on what he calls “America’s hybrid Enlightenment,” which married principles of the secular Enlightenment with elements of traditional Protestant Christian faith, to provide boundaries within which we could work through our political disagreements, this framework no longer holds. The result is a power struggle between rival visions of the meaning of America that often leads to political and civic dysfunction.
Even our nation’s founding principles become controversial in this tug-of-war. “Concepts such as justice, fairness, freedom, rights, equality, equity, tolerance, inclusion, hate, and the like,” Hunter writes, “are themselves contested and manipulable, because they too are lifted out of the context of larger conceptual frameworks or traditions from which those concepts derive their significance.” Divorced from the text of the Declaration and our 250-year-long conversation about its meaning, “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” becomes yet one more tool to be used against one’s opponents.
In such an environment teachers understandably feel uncomfortable teaching patriotism as a recent survey shows. When it comes to goals and values that U.S. history teachers rate as important or very important only 50 percent include “instilling civic pride in the nation.” Only 39 percent rate as important “cultivating an appreciation of the United States as an exceptional nation.”
President of Monticello Jane Kamensky distilled the uneasiness well when she noted on a panel at Jack Miller Center’s National Summit on Civic Education last year: “That’s why civics left the classroom in the 1960s, it was that patriotism seemed too close to religion, and as religion was evacuating the classroom, patriotism went with it.”
Notions of civil religion and American exceptionalism make it easy for patriotism to seem right-coded. And yet many on the left are increasingly recognizing the importance of patriotic civic education, even if the particulars are somewhat different from Trump administration guidelines. There is Professor Gage’s game provocation to progressives — “why not wear the [tricorn] hat and fly the flag?”
More concretely, a recent report by the Progressive Policy Institute urges schools to “teach what is distinctive and exceptional about America” and supports community service programs that “can instill in young people a sense of purpose and patriotism.” The Educating for American Democracy project, which is cross-partisan but includes many on the left, contends that “a healthy constitutional democracy always demands reflective patriotism.”
There is a will there, so what is the way? What can Americans of good will from left and right do for the coming anniversary? They can turn to the text of the Declaration.
As Danielle Allen has written, “There are no silver bullets for the problem of civility in our political life. There are no panaceas for educational reform. But if I were to pretend to offer either, it would be this: All adults should read the Declaration closely; all students should have read the Declaration from start to finish before they leave high school.”
Or as Steven Smith, political scientist at Yale University, puts it: “In our current environment, as always, the best teachers are old books. Patriotism can be taught only through a long and deep engagement with the founding texts of our political tradition.”
As we prepare to celebrate 250 years of America next year, let’s follow their advice. Let’s let those words that changed the world change us. Let’s read them slowly and carefully, discuss them with others, seek guidance from those who know and, having reflected on those words, see our reflection in our fellow Americans.
Thomas Kelly is the vice president of academic programs at the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America’s Founding Principles and History.