“To ensure alignment with the President’s directive”
On 12 August, White House officials sent a letter to the Smithsonian Institution stating that it “will be leading a comprehensive internal review…to ensure alignment with the President’s directive to celebrate American exceptionalism, remove divisive or partisan narratives, and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions.”
This political incursion into the operation of an independent establishment was first reported by the Wall Street Journal, which stated:
The Smithsonian Institution is popular and widely respected. So is the National Park Service. So are our schools, universities, and libraries. All are under attack. We the people need to protect our historical and scholarly institutions from trumpery, and from the ideologues and sycophants who are pushing it.
This political incursion into the operation of an independent establishment was first reported by the Wall Street Journal, which stated:
The White House plans to conduct a far-reaching review of Smithsonian museum exhibitions, materials and operations ahead of America’s 250th anniversary to ensure the museums align with President Trump’s interpretation of American history.The Civil War historian Kevin M. Levin responded:
First, let’s stop referring to Trump’s “interpretation of American history.” He doesn’t have an interpretation of anything remotely related to history. What Trump has is an authoritarian agenda that demands control over how Americans remember history as a means to justify its current political and ideological agenda and claim to power.At the Bulwark, Grand View University professor Thomas Lecaque took particular issue with the letter’s demand that “our national museums reflect the unity, progress, and enduring values that define the American story”:
This most recent act of censorship is right out of the authoritarian playbook and one we have already witnessed in reference to the National Park Service.
We uncover new sources; we apply new methodologies; we have new lenses to look at sources and new contexts. Languages, databases, technologies, viewpoints—we don’t rewrite history as we learn but rather ask new questions about the texts we already knew. Historians of every generation have new issues that they are interested in, that they read the texts and find are important. When today’s historians write about the historical effects of climate change or about the ways pandemics shape societies or about the lives of trans people in centuries past, we’re not “inventing” these things, we’re just paying new attention to things that have been there all along, and seeing them with fresh eyes.My perspective is that Donald Trump cares about what gratifies his ego. Sometimes that touches on history, such as when he promotes a false story about his golf course property being important in the Civil War or when he insists he’s outdone all previous Presidents on some measure. But studying history depends on respecting facts, and Trump has never done that—not in history, not in business, not in politics, not in his personal life.
I’ll tell you what the Trump administration is inventing, though. That line about “Americanism” in the Trump letter, focusing on the country’s “strength, breadth, and achievements”? That invitation to imagine a flawless nation making an unbroken string of progress is really just a bedtime story for children. White children. It’s not history; it’s not reality; it’s propaganda to allow Trump and his followers to sleep at night before they get up for another day of brutalizing people of color.
The Smithsonian Institution is popular and widely respected. So is the National Park Service. So are our schools, universities, and libraries. All are under attack. We the people need to protect our historical and scholarly institutions from trumpery, and from the ideologues and sycophants who are pushing it.
5 comments:
If Trump ever had classes in American history, it was likely during the ascendancy of the "consensus" approach, arguing against the Beards and their economic focus. US thought we needed unity as we faced the Soviet threat and related challenges of the Cold War. We gained unity by expelling the odd-balls and wingnuts, like Aptheker on the left and the small band of conservatives on the right.
(I'm 84 and my memory of that time may be faulty.)
Trump undoubtedly attended U.S. History classes during the Cold War. That experience may resurface in such matters as his admiration for Andrew Jackson, who was seen as more admirable in the age of Schlesinger than today.
However, most evidence suggests that Trump paid no attention to the details or thinking behind those classes. His remark on how the Continental Army “took over the airports,” his ignorance of the significance of Pearl Harbor, his repeated implications this week that Alaska isn’t part of the U.S. of A.—such evidence points to a profound disregard for historical facts.
In Trump’s case, calls for national unity are never about standing up to rivals or for fellow Americans. They’re all about demanding more admiration for Donald Trump.
Thank you for repeatedly pushing back on the Trump/Heritage Foundation/Project 2025 takeover of our country. It's all profoundly horrifying to this retired U.S. history teacher.
"This political incursion into the operation of an independent establishment"
"to ensure the museums align with President Trump’s interpretation of American history."
Politics had already wormed its way into the Smithsonian after the death of career criminal George Floyd.
When the Smithsonian unapologetically published that infamous infographic that actually tried to characterize admirable, practical, universal values like hard work, resilience, rationality, and politeness as somehow the product of "white supremacy", you knew we had entered the Twilight Zone created by the Cult of "Anti-Racism".
(A cult, by the way, that my half-Asian sons were victimized by. The cult's mentality lumps Asians in with "white" and here in Milton OPENLY justified violence against Asians as long as it was committed by blacks, who in their opinion "can not be racist".)
I won't disagree that Trump is a narcissist and is always looking to make a profit. But that doesn't necessarily make me discount every word that comes out of his mouth, or find a way to demonize every act of good that he does (like brokering half a dozen peace agreements). His instincts are often (but not always) good. At the very least, I believe he truly loves this country and does want to see every American succeed.
There is no doubt our public schools are not teaching anything close to actual history. They certainly are not giving the full story. At least that's our experience here in crazy Milton, home of the Suffolk Resolves House. Something needs to be done and that is why I have been so grateful to have the "Boston 1775" blog as a resource.
I would bet whatever small fortune I have that Trump would champion the version of history that the "Boston 1775" blog describes over the garbage the Smithsonian and Cult have published.
I commend RonC for not commenting anonymously on modern politics as others have tried to do. (I have to approve comments before they appear on this site because so many of them are spam.)
As to the content of that comment, I see strong opinions not backed up by strong facts.
“the death of career criminal George Floyd.”
Saying “the death” turns a blind eye to how a Minnesota court determined that police officer Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd. Chauvin also pled guilty to federal charges of violating the civil rights of Floyd and a 14-year-old boy he had similarly knelt on after handcuffing in 2017.
Floyd had indeed been convicted of crimes several times between 1997 and 2007, but after getting out of prison in 2013 he wasn’t arrested again.
Chauvin pled guilty to nine counts of tax evasion from 2014 to 2019—coincidentally the same years Floyd was in Minneapolis. We can assess which of these two men was then a “career criminal.”
“the Smithsonian unapologetically published that infamous infographic”
This presumably refers to a digital image that the National Museum of African American History and Culture issued on 31 May 2020 titled “Aspects and Assumptions of Whiteness & White Culture in the United States,” based on a 1978 book. People from many backgrounds criticized the graphic, with good reasons. Most of that criticism came in July 2020.
Far from acting “unapologetically,” the Smithsonian Institution apologized for that graphic and removed it from the website, as reported by the Washington Post and the Miami Herald on 17 July 2020.
Thus, the claim that “the Smithsonian unapologetically published that infamous infographic” is not only false, given that there was an apology, but also a grievance nursed for over five years now, based on material that was online for less than two months before being repudiated. That is a weak justification for any White House attempt to violate the law and dictate Smithsonian operations.
“brokering half a dozen peace agreements”
This remark parrots one of Donald Trump’s own boasts about himself. Politifact rates it Mostly False.
The commenter’s references to events in Milton are too vague to be traceable. But based on how the comment mischaracterizes other events we can assess independently, I have grave doubts that they are fully accurate.
And no one can credibly complain about other people being in a “Cult” while stating that Donald Trump “does want to see every American succeed.”
Post a Comment