Trump vs. The Smithsonian

Trump is unhappy with the Smithsonian. 

This started with EO 14253 on March 27, 2025. Some selected quotes from the EO.

"Over the past decade, Americans have witnessed a concerted and widespread effort to rewrite our Nation's history, replacing objective facts with a distorted narrative driven by ideology rather than truth."

"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. This shift has promoted narratives that portray American and Western values as inherently harmful and oppressive."

"The National Museum of African American History and Culture has proclaimed that 'hard work,' 'individualism,' and 'the nuclear family' are aspects of 'White culture."

The EO then goes on to lay out a high level plan to "restore the Smithsonian Institution to its rightful place as a symbol of inspiration and American greatness."

On August 21, 2025 a letter was sent to the Director of the Smithsonian outlining the process for an internal review of Smithsonian exhibits and requesting information to assist in the activity.

Also on August 21, 2025, a letter from the White House entitled "President Trump Is Right About the Smithsonian." It's unclear who wrote this as it isn't signed. It includes references to other documents talking about stuff that Trump apparently takes issue with.

I will highlight a few of the items.

"The National Museum of African American History and Culture debuted a series to educate people on 'a society that privileges white people and whiteness' — defining so-called 'white dominant culture' as 'ways white people and their traditions, attitudes, and ways of life have been normalized over time' and portraying 'the nuclear family,' 'work ethic,' and 'intellect as white qualities rooted in racism."

The paragraph included a link to what was a real infographic put out in 2020 by the Smithsonian in the National Museum of African American History and Culture (NMAAHC) about "Aspects & Assumptions of Whiteness and White Culture in the United States."

The implication being that the "normalization" of these things somehow oppresses people of color.

The one that REALLY gets me here is "Emphasis on Scientific Method." What would you prefer? Wishful thinking? The display was removed almost immediately after the uproar.

"The American History Museum prominently displays the 'Intersex-Inclusive Progress Pride flag' at its entrance, which was also flown alongside the American flag at multiple Smithsonian campuses."

Meh, who cares? The flag doesn't bother me but I can see why Trump and company would be all up in a lather over it. However, some would consider it a political issue and the Smithsonian shouldn't be taking sides in political debates.

"The National Portrait Gallery features art commemorating the act of illegally crossing the 'inclusive and exclusionary' southern border — even making it a finalist for one of its awards."

I'm going to go with this is sort of iffy. Why is the gallery what is considered an illegal act?

"The National Museum of the American Latino characterizes the Texas Revolution as a 'massive defense of slavery waged by ‘white Anglo Saxon’ settlers against anti-slavery Mexicans fighting for freedom, not a Texan war of independence from Mexico,' and frames the Mexican-American War as 'the North American invasion' that was 'unprovoked and motivated by pro-slavery politicians.'"

This must be an example of the "loser" writing history. But it's not entirely wrong. Mexico's abolishment of slavery was certainly a factor but there were a few others including Antonio López de Santa Anna abandonment of the 1824 federal constitution, the suspension of republican principles, the establishment of a centralist military government, the denial of trial by jury and forced adherence to Catholicism and the Mexican language.

The Mexican-American war was the result of the US annexing Texas, the independence of which Mexico had never recognized, and the resulting border dispute over whether the border was the Rio Grande, as claimed by the US, or the Nueces River, as claimed by Mexico, about 150 miles to the north. The area in between, known as the Nueces Strip, was a point of contention.

President James K. Polk ordered General Zachary Taylor and his troops into the disputed Nueces Strip in a move clearly intended to provoke the Mexican government who took the bait and attacked Taylor's troops. Polk used the skirmish as an excuse to declare war on Mexico.

"According to the National Museum of the American Latino, 'what unites Latinas and Latinos' is 'the Black Lives Matter movement.'"

I checked and this is actually what a museum exhibit says. I think if I was Latino, given the group's rich cultural heritage, I would be extremely insulted by this assertion.

"The National Portrait Gallery commissioned a “stop-motion drawing animation” that 'examines the career' of Anthony Fauci."

This is just Trump being a petty son of a bitch and reminds me why he should have never been elected.

"The American History Museum’s exhibit marking the 50th anniversary of Title IX includes biological men competing in women’s sports and argues in favor of 'transgender' athletes competing in sports against the opposite biological sex."

This is another political issue that the Smithsonian has no business getting involved with. Stick to the facts and leave the opinion at the front door.

"A exhibit at the American History Museum depicts migrants watching Independence Day fireworks 'through an opening in the U.S.-Mexico border wall' and says America’s founders 'feared non-White immigration.'"

Another political question that the museum shouldn't be getting involved in. As for the idea that founders "feared non-White immigration," I don't think the founders had any concept of non-White immigration.

The American History Museum’s 'Upending 1620' exhibit claims Pilgrims are a 'myth,' instead framing them as colonizers.

Well, they certainly existed although some of the stories about them are certainly romanticized. But that doesn't excuse simply putting a totally different opinion on the table as fact. A balanced presentation is what a museum should be providing and not a debatable opinion. Just the facts man, just present the facts.

"The American History Museum’s exhibit about Benjamin Franklin focuses almost solely on slavery, directing visitors to learn more about his 'electrical experiments and the enslaved people of his household,' noting his 'scientific accomplishments were enabled by the social and economic system he worked within.'"

Franklyn did own slaves in his youth. However, later in life he became a staunch abolitionist. This should at least have been noted. I don't even know what "his scientific accomplishments were enabled by the social and economic system he worked within" means.

This strikes me as an idiotic and unnecessary statement since ALL accomplishments are enabled by the prevailing social and economic system. This exhibit sounds like an attempt to wipe out all of Franklyn's accomplishments because he owned slaves.

So, what's the bottom line? I've never made it a secret that "wokeness" annoys the shit out of me. So I agree with Trump and company on some of these things and disagree on others. I left out a lot of items that I thought were just petty and silly to get upset over. I suppose my basic opinion is that a museum should present facts, and balanced facts where appropriate, rather than presenting opinion as fact.