On March 27, the Trump administration passed an executive order to review and overhaul eight Smithsonian museums prior to the nation’s 250th birthday. This review aims to establish alignment with the administration’s perspective of American ideals and to “celebrate American exceptionalism.”
In the order titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” it states, “Once widely respected as a symbol of American excellence and a global icon of cultural achievement, the Smithsonian Institution has, in recent years, come under the influence of a divisive, race-centered ideology.”
Museums specified in this order include the American Art Museum, which the administration asserted “promoted divisive ideology” with their claim about race being a factor in systems of power in America.
As well as this, President Trump has commented on the National Museum of African American History and Culture, stating that the exhibits “focus too much on how bad slavery was.”
Other museums being evaluated include the National Museum of the American Indian and National Museum of Natural History.
As this overhaul is being enacted, different perspectives have arisen, some being of concern. The question of whether it is appropriate for the president to govern institutions like the Smithsonian and influence what is displayed in exhibits is one in many people’s minds.
Jeff Isola ’98 commented, “What the Trump administration is doing by attempting to have such a direct influence is kind of unprecedented.”
As well as this, people doubt whether this review will actually solve ideological divisiveness or make the issue worse. “When you have government leaders that want to shy away from bad things and promote a one-sided view of history, it only leads us into more of a divisive nature because the people’s past that is missed, they want that to be taught.” said Cory Nelson, a social sciences teacher.
The necessity of this review is debated, with some viewing it as an attempt to erase aspects of history by the Trump administration, and others viewing it as a way of reemphasizing America’s strengths.
“The problem is for much of our history the focus was on exceptionalism and ignoring the negative, and the idea is that they’re trying to swing the pendulum the opposite. In that regard I do agree with what conservatives say that we’ve gone almost overboard looking at the negative and not celebrating the good.” Isola said.
Whether or not altering the exhibits at the Smithsonian is the proper method of achieving American exceptionalism, people opposed to the executive order note that true exceptionalism can only be reached if all perspectives are openly shared, and people are informed of the whole picture.
“Sharing all perspectives in history gives us a fuller picture of what has happened in the past, instead of just one version… If you’re able to see all the pieces of an event, you get a truer version of history.” stated Kaia Burris ’27.
