I know, I know: Ethics Alarms’ annual “Remember the Alamo!’ posts usually don’t start until February. But an important Alamo story with ethics lessons reaching beyond the legendary Texas battle is in the news, and attention should be paid.

Kate Rogers had been leading the $550 million renovation of the Alamo in San Antonio, Texas. Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick reviewed a copy of her 2023 PhD dissertation on museums affecting history is taught in schools. “Personally, I would love to see the Alamo become a beacon for historical reconciliation and a place that brings people together versus tearing them apart, but politically that may not be possible at this time,” her dissertation stated. Patrick asked her to resign as CEO of the Alamo Trust based on that sentiment, and Rogers refused. declined. The next day, Patrick publicly called for her resignation. This time, Rogers complied.

This week, Rogers sued, alleging wrongful termination. The theory: forcing her to resign for what she wrote in her dissertation was a violation of her free speech rights. The dissertation wasn’t the whole story, however. On her watch, a social media post from the Alamo Trust had prompted this letter…

It said in part, “I have serious concerns regarding the writing, approval, and posting process of the Alamo Trust, Inc. (ATI) Communications Team in coordination with ATI leadership…. This is not the first incident that has highlighted personnel who are misaligned with the culture of The Alamo…. Specifically, the second draft of the Visitors Center & Museum (VCM) script, where a ‘Land Acknowledgement’ plaque was to be displayed in the lobby. Additionally, ‘Freedom’ was only mentioned once, ‘Liberty’ a mere 13 times, but ‘Slavery’ and ‘Enslaved’ were mentioned nearly 70 times. This speaks to a pattern of behavior that is completely misaligned with the priorities of my office, and the vast majority of Texans who care so deeply for our Shrine of Liberty.”

Key point: “This blatant disregard of the battle-centric focus of the Alamo that most Texans expect—the “liberty or death” history—must be addressed immediately.”

Rogers’ dissertation, only written two years ago so a major attitudinal shift seems unlikely, was strong evidence that the anti-American historical revisionism that the leftest historical community has been trying to inflict on the Alamo had infected the official tasked with the site’s renovation. On that basis alone, her removal seems justified and prudent.

The current woke contempt for the over 200 men who died in the iconic 1836 massacre is exemplified by this mid-George Floyd Freakout op-ed from 2021 by the authors of “Forget the Alamo.” Under their agenda-driven analysis, the defenders of the fort were the bad guys, with the army of ruthless dictator Santa Anna bravely fighting on behalf of “enslaved people,” (digression: when was the word “slaves” banned by the woke word police?) since the American immigrants Mexico had invited to settle the area often owned slaves. The indoctrinated anti-heroic spin holding that a group of men who willingly sacrificed their lives for what they believed was preservation of their homes and defense of fellow Texas settlers were only fighting for slavery is a repurposing of the dishonest “1619 Project” that condemns the Founders and the American Revolution on the same basis.

Kate Rogers may be a Republican and a conservative, but the woke attack on American exceptionalism, values and history through the schools, colleges and news media and has had its effect on the whole population. Everything is about race, America’s failings, and shame in the anti-American cultural assault. President Trump’s efforts to halt the demonizing of the United States and its heroes in museums and history courses is wise and important, and the recent Alamo controversy makes the point.

Davy Crockett was not a slave-holder, and he definitely didn’t give his life at the Alamo to defend slavery. He was fighting side by side with fellow Americans who wanted to be freed from an oppressive dictatorship. “Liberty of Death,” Travis’s words, must remain the lesson of the battle, not “These poor, ignorant white supremacists believed blacks existed to serve them and brown people had no right to defend their own country from racist invaders.”

It is both reasonable and responsible not to trust Kate Rogers to understand that.