{"id":22654,"date":"2026-05-13T17:17:14","date_gmt":"2026-05-13T21:17:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/?p=22654"},"modified":"2026-05-13T17:17:14","modified_gmt":"2026-05-13T21:17:14","slug":"wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/","title":{"rendered":"Wall Street Journal: This Is No Way to Preserve History (1993)"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

On this day in 1993…<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The Wall Street Journal
\nThursday, May 13, 1993
\nThis Is No Way to Preserve History
\nBy James Bovard<\/h1>\n

This is National Preservation Week. While Americans have
\ncommendably become more interested in their past, historic
\npreservation itself has unfortunately become a pretext for mass
\nconfiscation. In hundreds of locales, the older a house becomes, the
\nless right homeowners have to control their own property. Unless
\ncurrent trends are reversed, the historic preservation movement
\ncould seize control of millions of American buildings.<\/p>\n

Preservationists have “progressed” from targeting specific
\nbuildings, to targeting neighborhoods, to targeting entire cities
\nfor strict, government-enforced controls. Escondido, Calif.,
\ndesignated all buildings more than 50 years old historic structures
\nand prohibited owners from demolishing them without paying a large
\ndemolition fee to the city government. The owner of one rickety,
\nboarded-up old shack was stopped from selling it — even though the
\nowner three times offered to donate the shack to the city, as long
\nas the city would pay to move the shack away. (The city government
\nrejected his offer.)<\/p>\n

In the 1950s, intellectuals denounced prevailing suburban
\narchitectural styles as proof of the soullessness of American
\nculture. In the 1990s, activists on historic preservation boards are
\ndecreeing that 1950s neighborhoods are so special that local police
\nmust prohibit any homeowners from improving their homes’ exteriors.
\nIn Hanover, Va., the local government imposed strict preservation
\ncontrols over a 43-acre tract surrounding an old courthouse. One
\noutraged woman retaliated by placing tacky pink flamingoes on her
\nfront lawn. Elmyra Taylor complained, “I cannot paint my house, I
\ncannot paint the fence, I cannot remove trees or tree limbs without
\npermission from an architectural review board and county
\nsupervisors, who have been most unreasonable.”<\/p>\n

Historic preservation has also become a tool to drive out poor <\/strong>
\nminorities<\/strong>. A HUD investigation concluded in 1988 that a decision by
\nAlexandria, Va., to designate a 50-block black neighborhood as a
\nhistoric district “was specifically intended to displace low — and
\nmoderate — income blacks” from their homes “in order to upgrade
\nproperties and . . . to promote the rise of property values and
\nattraction of new residents.” In Arlington County, Va., blacks in
\nthe “historic” Maywood neighborhood bitterly protested in 1991 about
\nbeing required to submit 10 copies of forms to get permission to
\ninstall air conditioning in their homes.<\/p>\n

In January 1991, the Washington, D.C., Historic Preservation
\nReview Board imposed historic landmark status on a boarded-up,
\ndeteriorating four-story apartment building on a stretch of
\nMassachusetts Ave. long since gone to urban hell. The board hailed
\nthe apartment building as an “excellent example of the popular
\ntransference of many of the forms . . . of the traditional
\nWashington rowhouse to early apartment house design.” But the
\nbuilding is now a crumbling flophouse that has long been used by
\nvagrants, drug users and prostitutes; nine fires occurred there over
\na two-year period. (Ironically, the building sits across from a
\nboarded-up fire station.) The building’s owner seeks to tear it down
\nand replace it with commercial office space, but is tied up in court
\nbattles stemming from the building’s historic status.<\/p>\n

Historic preservation judgments increasingly threaten freedom of <\/strong>
\nreligion<\/strong>. In 1991, Washington, D.C., effectively imposed a
\npreliminary injunction against a Christian Science church to prevent
\nit from modifying a bunkerlike church and office building built in
\n1971 while the structures were being considered for historic
\ndesignation. The church exemplifies the depravity of the “brutal
\nschool” of architecture. The Christian Scientists have already spent
\ntens of thousands of dollars in legal fees fighting this case.<\/p>\n

Chicago passed a Landmarks Ordinance that allowed religious
\nproperties to exempt themselves from historic designation. The
\nNational Trust for Historic Preservation was outraged, and warned
\nthat such an ordinance was unconstitutional because it “has the
\npurpose and effect of endorsing religion, in violation of the First
\nAmendment establishment clause.” In other words, if the government
\nis effectively persecuting property owners in general, it is
\nunconstitutional if it does not also persecute churches.<\/p>\n

In 1991, Texas passed a statute requiring any owner who intended
\nto damage a designated historic landmark in any way to get
\npermission from the local government or from the Texas Historical
\nCommission before acting. As Anice Read of the commission wrote,
\n“Those not securing the required permits would be required to
\nreconstruct the structure or to make just compensation to the city
\nor to the Texas Historical Commission of an amount equal to the
\nvalue of the structure.” The Texas statute vivifies the real meaning
\nof historic preservation: Once controls are imposed, government
\nbecomes the de facto owner — and the property owner must compensate
\nthe government for any damage he does to the property.<\/p>\n

Power lust sometimes appears to be at the bottom of the <\/strong>
\npreservation movement.<\/strong> Laurie Beckelman, chairwoman of New York
\nCity’s Landmarks Preservation Commission, hailed a court decision as
\naffirming the commission’s “absolute power . . . to designate and
\nregulate religious properties as landmarks.” Chuck Geitner, chairman
\nof the Naperville, Ill., Historic District Commission, with
\njurisdiction over a 60-block area, announced in 1991, “We listen to
\npeople, and, when we think it’s appropriate, we grant them the power
\nto do what they wish.”<\/p>\n

Preservation advocates sometimes sound as if they simply wish to <\/strong>
\nsummon the local police to enforce their own sentimentality<\/strong>.
\nWashington Post architectural critic Benjamin Forgey wrote last
\nyear: “There’s a simple test one can apply to determine whether
\ngovernment should impose preservation controls: Stand in front of
\nsuch a building, close your eyes and picture it gone. If the result
\nis that you would really, really miss it, then it may need help.”<\/p>\n

Many historic preservation commissions appear so eager to sweep
\nmore houses under their jurisdiction that they have little or no
\nidea how many homes’ exteriors they already control. Mary Ann
\nRolland, a historic preservation planner for Montgomery County, Md.,
\ncould not provide even a rough estimate of how many homes are
\ncovered by historic preservation restrictions in the county, though
\nshe was enthusiastic that the county had just imposed historic
\ncontrols on 900 homes in Takoma Park, Md.<\/p>\n

Some preservationists have advocated that buildings routinely be
\ndeemed historic when they become 50 years old. Yet, according to the
\nU.S. Census Bureau, there are more than 18 million housing units in
\nthe U.S. built before 1940 — almost 20% of the nation’s housing
\nstock. Does an individual’s right to control his own property
\nautomatically decline by two percentage points a year?<\/p>\n

America’s churches and homeowners have enough problems without <\/strong>
\nbeing subjected to a dictatorship of gadflies. Trampling the Bill of <\/strong>
\nRights — perhaps America’s most important historic achievement — <\/strong>
\nis no way to preserve history.<\/strong><\/p>\n

—<\/p>\n

Mr. Bovard writes often on public policy.<\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n

The article evoked plenty of hostile responses, including from the president of the National Trust for Historic Preservation:<\/p>\n

The Wall Street Journal
\nThursday, June 10, 1993
\nLetters to the Editor: Landmark Decisions<\/p>\n

James Bovard’s diatribe (“This Is No Way to Preserve History,”
\neditorial page, May 13) constitutes a distortion and a disservice to
\nthe thousands of communities working reasonably and successfully to
\nprotect their heritage. Contrary to his outrageous assertion that
\npreservationists seek to “seize control of millions of American
\nbuildings,” most preservationists do not believe that all old
\nbuildings should be saved simply because they are old. Rather,
\npreserving and using old buildings is an essential part of creating
\nstable, livable communities for all Americans.<\/p>\n

While preservation ordinances do require property owners to
\ncomply with clear procedures before unnecessarily or unwittingly
\ndestroying unique historic, cultural and architectural resources,
\nthey also include economic hardship provisions to ensure that
\nowners’ property rights are not unduly burdened. Even such zealous
\nguardians of private property rights as Justices Rehnquist and
\nScalia agree that landmark laws are a valid exercise of the state’s
\npolice power and are fully constitutional.<\/p>\n

It is a principle of jurisprudence even older than the
\nConstitution that an owner must not use his property to damage the
\nproperty of another. This reasoning is the basis for zoning laws
\nthat prohibit a neighbor from converting his residentially zoned
\nproperty to industrial uses, even if the conversion would bring a
\nhigher economic return. For more than 100 years, up to and including
\nlast year’s Lucas decision, the Supreme Court has consistently held
\nthat government regulation that merely diminishes the value of
\nprivate property is not a violation of the Fifth Amendment’s
\n“taking” clause or any other provision of the Bill of Rights.<\/p>\n

Mr. Bovard claims that preservation laws violate the principle of
\nchurch-state separation. But the courts have made it clear that
\nchurches are not exempt from the law by virtue of their religious
\nactivities. They must comply with fire codes, for instance, as well
\nas landmark protection laws. This is not “trampling the Bill of
\nRights” as long as churches are not singled out for any special
\ntreatment because of their religious practices.<\/p>\n

Preservation of historic communities helps to stabilize
\nneighborhoods, reverse urban blight and engender citizen pride in
\nhome and community. In pursuit of these goals, preservationists
\nsometimes make mistakes. But generalizing from isolated instances of
\nerror or misjudgment to indict the entire preservation movement is
\npure demagoguery.<\/p>\n

Richard Moe<\/p>\n

President<\/p>\n

National Trust for Historic Preservation<\/p>\n

Washington<\/p>\n

—<\/p>\n

I take exception to Mr. Bovard’s quoting me to help support his
\nviews that preservation is equivalent to confiscation.<\/p>\n

My statement was taken out of context from an article describing
\naction taken by the city of San Antonio to deal with flagrant abuses
\nby those who would flout existing laws. In this particular case a
\ndeveloper had cynically willfully demolished an outstanding local
\nlandmark under cover of darkness — knowing full well that his only
\npunishment would be a relatively modest (to him) $25,000 fine.<\/p>\n

The state legislation enacted reflected the statewide outrage
\nthat resulted.<\/p>\n

Anice Read<\/p>\n

Director<\/p>\n

Texas Main Street Program<\/p>\n

Austin, Texas<\/p>\n

—<\/p>\n

My thanks to Mr. Bovard for lifting the velvet curtain off the
\nhistoric preservationists and revealing their malevolent attitudes
\nand confiscatory actions. Scorning constitutional guarantees of
\nproperty rights, this arbitrary amalgam of obstructionists has
\ntwisted a reasonable sympathy for truly historic buildings and
\nplaces into a fascist attack on virtually all development and
\nchange. Looking back on a quarter century of architectural practice,
\nI have seen few rivals to the preservationists for insidious acts of
\nde facto appropriation and seizure — with the possible exception of
\ntheir equally twisted sisters, the zoning boards. Perhaps we could
\nset these groups at odds with each other by parking 50-year-old
\ncamper-trailers in our driveways.<\/p>\n

Dan Chain<\/p>\n

General Partner<\/p>\n

Atria Architects<\/p>\n

Newington, Conn.<\/p>\n

—<\/p>\n

For 10 years I have been a preservation advocate in Chicago,
\nworking principally with minority communities and church
\ncongregations seeking to preserve their buildings. I have worked in
\nthese areas not because they were targeted, but because our job is
\nto respond to communities that ask for our assistance.<\/p>\n

If you are worshiping in a landmark church in Chicago, you are
\nmost likely African-American. Many such churches were designated to
\nprevent their demolition by the large-scale urban renewal plans of
\nthe white establishment. Holy Family Church in Chicago was to be
\ndemolished because its small, poor minority congregation “needed”
\nsocial services rather than a Gothic cathedral. The only hitch was
\nthat the small, poor minority parishioners did not agree. They
\nfought the decision, formed a coalition that included the mayor, and
\nrestored the church. Chicago’s landmarks ordinance excludes churches
\nsimply because once a very wealthy Presbyterian church was concerned
\nthat landmark status would impinge on its ability to sell its
\nvaluable site for millions of dollars. This is not an inference, but
\nthe justification stated when the presbytery voted against
\ndesignation.<\/p>\n

Churches in Chicago can now join other property owners in
\nassembling land for speculation, and their property-tax exemption
\ngives them a competitive advantage not enjoyed by homeowners.<\/p>\n

Generally, historic areas see an increase in value after
\ndesignation, because buyers know that the area’s character — and
\nhence its value — is protected. Developers screamed in Chicago in
\n1872 when the city banned wooden buildings after the devastating
\nfire of 1871. But the city was safer, and so were real estate
\nvalues.<\/p>\n

This is why people in some of Chicago’s poorest neighborhoods
\nseek landmark designation. They have seen the vagrants and drug
\nusers and prostitutes in the abandoned buildings, and they have seen
\nthose buildings demolished. Half the buildings in their historic
\nneighborhoods have been lost.<\/p>\n

Schoolteacher Floyd Butler has formed Young Urban
\nPreservationists for at-risk inner-city youth. Children without hope
\nare shown the value inherent in neighborhoods that only looked
\nnegative before. When they see the potential for value in their
\ncommunity, they see potential in themselves. Historic preservation
\nhas progressed from a hobby of aesthetes to a model for community
\nempowerment. It has progressed from a circle of architects and
\nsocialites to a cross-section of democracy ranging from the inner
\ncity to the farm. It will continue to progress, no matter how often
\nMr. Bovard writes about public policy issues he does not understand.<\/p>\n

Vincent L. Michael<\/p>\n

Chicago Programs Director<\/p>\n

Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois<\/p>\n

Chicago<\/p>\n

—<\/p>\n

In his references to the Third Church of Christ Scientist, in
\nWashington, D.C., Mr. Bovard suggests that only the most traditional
\nof buildings can be landmarks. Such is not the case. This
\nprovocative, award-winning complex was designed by I.M. Pei &
\nPartners, one of the most celebrated U.S. architectural firms of the
\npost-World War II era. The Commission of Fine Arts noted that it was
\nthe only modern structure included in the commission’s series of
\nbooks documenting the architecture of Massachusetts Avenue and 16th
\nStreet.<\/p>\n

Mr. Bovard is also incorrect when he states that a “preliminary
\ninjunction” was imposed against the church to prevent it from making
\nmodifications. D.C. law requires the Historic Preservation Review
\nBoard to act within 90 days upon a landmark application when an
\nowner files an application for alterations or demolition. No such
\napplication has been filed, and in fact, the owner of the complex
\nrequested a postponement of a hearing while the owner and the
\napplicants for landmark designation have been working toward an
\nagreed upon solution for the site.<\/p>\n

Mr. Bovard attempts to paint historic preservationists as
\npower-crazed, irrational zealots. I sit on the board of the D.C.
\nPreservation League with real estate developers, bankers, corporate
\nlawyers, architects and accountants. Decisions to file landmark
\napplications are made after careful deliberations — usually
\nfollowing a comprehensive, citywide survey of a particular building
\ntype. Over the years, successful solutions for the redevelopment of
\nnumerous landmark buildings have resulted from negotiations between
\nthe League and building owners. Contrary to Mr. Bovard’s statement,
\nthis is the way to preserve history.<\/p>\n

James F. Rogers<\/p>\n

President<\/p>\n

D.C. Preservation League<\/p>\n

Washington<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

On this day in 1993…   The Wall Street Journal Thursday, May 13, 1993 This Is No Way to Preserve History By James Bovard This is National Preservation Week. While Americans have commendably become more interested in their past, historic preservation itself has unfortunately become a pretext for mass confiscation. In hundreds of locales, the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":22655,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[4829,4830,4827,4828,369],"class_list":["post-22654","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-diatribe","tag-gadflies","tag-historic-preservation","tag-national-trust-for-historic-preservation","tag-property-rights-2"],"yoast_head":"\nWall Street Journal: This Is No Way to Preserve History (1993) - James Bovard<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"HIstoric preservation activists have become a dictatorship of gadflies, as I explained in this 1993 Wall Street Journal piece\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Wall Street Journal: This Is No Way to Preserve History (1993) - James Bovard\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"HIstoric preservation activists have become a dictatorship of gadflies, as I explained in this 1993 Wall Street Journal piece\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"James Bovard\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/jim.bovard\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-05-13T21:17:14+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/JPB-1993-WSJ-Historic-Preswith-shrunk-headline.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1015\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Jim\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@jimbovard\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Jim\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/13\\\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/13\\\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Jim\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/79550830ad81c14be529a2c37469974f\"},\"headline\":\"Wall Street Journal: This Is No Way to Preserve History (1993)\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-13T21:17:14+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/13\\\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":2458,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/13\\\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/JPB-1993-WSJ-Historic-Preswith-shrunk-headline.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"diatribe\",\"gadflies\",\"historic preservation\",\"National Trust for Historic Preservation\",\"Property rights\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/13\\\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/13\\\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/13\\\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\\\/\",\"name\":\"Wall Street Journal: This Is No Way to Preserve History (1993) - James Bovard\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/13\\\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/13\\\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/JPB-1993-WSJ-Historic-Preswith-shrunk-headline.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-13T21:17:14+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/79550830ad81c14be529a2c37469974f\"},\"description\":\"HIstoric preservation activists have become a dictatorship of gadflies, as I explained in this 1993 Wall Street Journal piece\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/13\\\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/13\\\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/13\\\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/JPB-1993-WSJ-Historic-Preswith-shrunk-headline.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/JPB-1993-WSJ-Historic-Preswith-shrunk-headline.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":1015},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/13\\\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Wall Street Journal: This Is No Way to Preserve History (1993)\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"James Bovard\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/79550830ad81c14be529a2c37469974f\",\"name\":\"Jim\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/d95466cfd0934e38803c5035629df727ae4ec1f3f96c6883c05b5c52e2044505?s=96&d=mm&r=r\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/d95466cfd0934e38803c5035629df727ae4ec1f3f96c6883c05b5c52e2044505?s=96&d=mm&r=r\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/d95466cfd0934e38803c5035629df727ae4ec1f3f96c6883c05b5c52e2044505?s=96&d=mm&r=r\",\"caption\":\"Jim\"},\"description\":\"Bovard's homepage is at http:\\\/\\\/www.jimbovard.com He can be contacted at jim@jimbovard.com James Bovard is the author of ten books. The Wall Street Journal called Bovard \\\"the roving inspector general of the modern state\\\" and Washington Post columnist George Will called him a \\\"one-man truth squad.\\\" His 1994 book, Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty, received the Free Press Association\u2019s Mencken Award as Book of the Year. His Terrorism & Tyranny won the Lysander Spooner \\\"Best Book on Liberty in 2003\\\" award. He received the Thomas Szasz Award for Civil Liberties work, awarded by the Center for Independent Thought and the Freedom Fund Award from the Firearms Civil Rights Defense Fund of the National Rifle Association. Bovard\u2019s writings have been publicly denounced by FBI director Louis Freeh, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, the Postmaster General, and the chiefs of the U.S. International Trade Commission, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, as well as by many congressmen and other malcontents.\",\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/www.jimbovard.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/jim.bovard\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/jimbovard\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/author\\\/admin\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Wall Street Journal: This Is No Way to Preserve History (1993) - James Bovard","description":"HIstoric preservation activists have become a dictatorship of gadflies, as I explained in this 1993 Wall Street Journal piece","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Wall Street Journal: This Is No Way to Preserve History (1993) - James Bovard","og_description":"HIstoric preservation activists have become a dictatorship of gadflies, as I explained in this 1993 Wall Street Journal piece","og_url":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/","og_site_name":"James Bovard","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/jim.bovard","article_published_time":"2026-05-13T21:17:14+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":1015,"url":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/JPB-1993-WSJ-Historic-Preswith-shrunk-headline.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Jim","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@jimbovard","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Jim","Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/"},"author":{"name":"Jim","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/79550830ad81c14be529a2c37469974f"},"headline":"Wall Street Journal: This Is No Way to Preserve History (1993)","datePublished":"2026-05-13T21:17:14+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/"},"wordCount":2458,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/JPB-1993-WSJ-Historic-Preswith-shrunk-headline.jpg","keywords":["diatribe","gadflies","historic preservation","National Trust for Historic Preservation","Property rights"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/","url":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/","name":"Wall Street Journal: This Is No Way to Preserve History (1993) - James Bovard","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/JPB-1993-WSJ-Historic-Preswith-shrunk-headline.jpg","datePublished":"2026-05-13T21:17:14+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/79550830ad81c14be529a2c37469974f"},"description":"HIstoric preservation activists have become a dictatorship of gadflies, as I explained in this 1993 Wall Street Journal piece","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/JPB-1993-WSJ-Historic-Preswith-shrunk-headline.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/JPB-1993-WSJ-Historic-Preswith-shrunk-headline.jpg","width":1200,"height":1015},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/13\/wall-street-journal-this-is-no-way-to-preserve-history-1993\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Wall Street Journal: This Is No Way to Preserve History (1993)"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/","name":"James Bovard","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/79550830ad81c14be529a2c37469974f","name":"Jim","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d95466cfd0934e38803c5035629df727ae4ec1f3f96c6883c05b5c52e2044505?s=96&d=mm&r=r","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d95466cfd0934e38803c5035629df727ae4ec1f3f96c6883c05b5c52e2044505?s=96&d=mm&r=r","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d95466cfd0934e38803c5035629df727ae4ec1f3f96c6883c05b5c52e2044505?s=96&d=mm&r=r","caption":"Jim"},"description":"Bovard's homepage is at http:\/\/www.jimbovard.com He can be contacted at jim@jimbovard.com James Bovard is the author of ten books. The Wall Street Journal called Bovard \"the roving inspector general of the modern state\" and Washington Post columnist George Will called him a \"one-man truth squad.\" His 1994 book, Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty, received the Free Press Association\u2019s Mencken Award as Book of the Year. His Terrorism & Tyranny won the Lysander Spooner \"Best Book on Liberty in 2003\" award. He received the Thomas Szasz Award for Civil Liberties work, awarded by the Center for Independent Thought and the Freedom Fund Award from the Firearms Civil Rights Defense Fund of the National Rifle Association. Bovard\u2019s writings have been publicly denounced by FBI director Louis Freeh, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, the Postmaster General, and the chiefs of the U.S. International Trade Commission, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, as well as by many congressmen and other malcontents.","sameAs":["http:\/\/www.jimbovard.com","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/jim.bovard","https:\/\/x.com\/jimbovard"],"url":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/author\/admin\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22654","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22654"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22654\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":22656,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22654\/revisions\/22656"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/22655"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22654"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22654"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22654"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}