Trump signs order to ‘restore’ American history with Smithsonian Institution overhaul

Imagine walking through a museum, where the exhibits you encounter tell the story of a nation—its triumphs, its mistakes, its complexities. Now, picture those exhibits being reshaped, refocused, and reinterpreted through a new lens. This is exactly what former President Donald Trump’s executive order seeks to achieve by “restoring” American history within the walls of the Smithsonian Institution. With a stroke of a pen, the narrative of how Americans view their past is poised for a dramatic shift—one that emphasizes a more patriotic vision of the nation’s journey.

But what does it mean to “restore” history? Does history bend to the will of the present, or should it stand firm in the face of political winds? As Trump’s order aims to overhaul the Smithsonian’s exhibitions and educational initiatives, questions of historical accuracy, political influence, and national identity come to the forefront. Will this change elevate pride in America’s legacy, or risk distorting it for the sake of political ideology? The stakes are high, and the future of how we understand our past is now in question.

Background: What Led to the Executive Order

In recent years, the portrayal of American history in public institutions, particularly museums, has become a topic of heated debate. Critics have pointed to what they view as a growing trend of revising history to reflect more politically correct or progressive narratives. In response to these concerns, Donald Trump’s administration pushed forward with an executive order aimed at reshaping how history is presented, with a specific focus on the Smithsonian Institution, one of the most influential cultural establishments in the United States. Trump’s goal was clear: to “restore” what he considered to be a more patriotic version of American history, which he argued had been lost or distorted in recent decades.

Trump’s executive order came amidst growing divisions over the portrayal of historical figures and events that are now viewed through a modern lens. Statues of controversial figures were being torn down, and historical monuments were coming under scrutiny. This cultural reckoning sparked a larger conversation about the representation of America’s past, with some arguing that the nation’s true history was being whitewashed, while others feared that historical context was being overlooked in favor of political agendas. In this climate, Trump’s order to overhaul the Smithsonian Institution appeared to be a direct challenge to what he saw as the growing revisionism in America’s historical narrative.

At the heart of Trump’s push was a vision of history that celebrated American exceptionalism and emphasized the positive aspects of the nation’s past. For Trump, the narrative of American history had been overshadowed by an emphasis on slavery, racism, and other negative aspects of the country’s development. His administration viewed this approach as damaging to national pride and sought to shift the focus toward a more uplifting portrayal of America’s history—one that emphasized the country’s founding principles, its successes, and the contributions of its people to the world stage.

Key Features of the Executive Order

The executive order signed by Trump outlined several key components aimed at reshaping the Smithsonian Institution’s exhibitions and educational efforts. One of the main features was a directive to reexamine how American history is presented in Smithsonian museums and exhibits. The order called for a focus on restoring a more “patriotic” portrayal of history, one that aligns with Trump’s vision of American greatness. This meant that exhibits and educational programs would be scrutinized to ensure they highlighted the positive aspects of American history, such as the country’s founding ideals, its contributions to global progress, and the achievements of its people.

The order also tasked the Smithsonian with reevaluating the representation of historical figures, events, and movements that had been the subject of controversy in recent years. This included rethinking how figures such as Christopher Columbus, Andrew Jackson, and others who have been criticized for their roles in the history of slavery and colonization were portrayed. Under the new directive, there would be a stronger emphasis on American heroes and the accomplishments that made the United States a global leader. The goal was to present these figures in a way that celebrated their contributions, while still acknowledging their flaws and the complexities of their legacies.

A crucial aspect of the overhaul was a commitment to educating future generations of Americans about the country’s history in a way that would inspire pride and national unity. The executive order mandated that the Smithsonian develop new programs that focused on American exceptionalism, using the institution’s vast resources to create exhibits and learning materials that showcased the nation’s achievements. Trump’s administration viewed this as a way to counter what they saw as a growing tendency in academia and media to portray America in a negative light, particularly with regard to issues like slavery, racism, and inequality.

Reactions and Criticisms

As with any major policy initiative, Trump’s executive order on the Smithsonian overhaul sparked a range of reactions from both supporters and critics. Supporters of the order lauded the move as a much-needed corrective to what they saw as an ideological shift in the way American history was being taught and represented in public institutions. They argued that the order would help restore a sense of pride in America’s past, particularly for younger generations who might feel disconnected from the country’s founding principles. For many, the Smithsonian overhaul was seen as an opportunity to reframe American history in a way that would inspire patriotism and a deeper appreciation for the nation’s achievements.

However, the order faced significant opposition from historians, educators, and cultural institutions, who voiced concerns about the political motivations behind the move. Critics argued that the executive order was an attempt to sanitize history, downplaying the darker chapters of America’s past, such as slavery, the treatment of Native Americans, and the nation’s legacy of racial inequality. Some feared that the push for a more “patriotic” history would lead to a distortion of facts, presenting a one-sided version of history that ignored the complexities and contradictions of the American experience. The Smithsonian, in particular, came under scrutiny for its role in potentially complying with a political agenda rather than maintaining its reputation for impartial, evidence-based historical representation.

The debate over the Smithsonian overhaul also raised broader questions about the role of museums and cultural institutions in shaping public understanding of history. Museums like the Smithsonian have long been considered trusted sources of education, offering visitors an opportunity to engage with history in a thoughtful and nuanced way. Critics of the executive order argued that introducing political influence into the curatorial process could undermine the integrity of the institution, leading to the manipulation of historical narratives for ideological purposes. For many, the Smithsonian’s role as a public trust—one that represents the diversity and complexity of the American experience—was at risk of being compromised by the push to present a more uniform, celebratory version of history.

The Smithsonian’s Response

The Smithsonian Institution, as the world’s largest museum complex, is deeply invested in preserving the integrity of its exhibits and educational programs. While the institution has yet to fully implement the changes outlined in Trump’s executive order, it has made clear that it will approach the overhaul with caution. The Smithsonian’s leadership has emphasized that its mission to educate the public about American history, culture, and science will remain rooted in rigorous scholarship and evidence-based research. This commitment to accuracy has been a hallmark of the Smithsonian’s work for over a century, and officials have indicated that any changes to exhibits or educational programs will reflect the institution’s dedication to providing a comprehensive and balanced view of history.

At the same time, the Smithsonian has acknowledged the political and cultural climate in which the executive order was issued. The institution has expressed its intention to engage in a dialogue with the public, scholars, and historians to ensure that any changes made to its programming are reflective of the diverse perspectives that make up the American experience. There is also a recognition that, while the Smithsonian must adhere to the intent of the executive order, it must do so in a way that does not compromise its core mission as a trusted and unbiased source of information. As such, the Smithsonian is walking a fine line between responding to the executive order and maintaining its credibility as a leading institution in historical scholarship.

The challenge facing the Smithsonian is not just a matter of implementing the executive order; it is about balancing the demands of political influence with the institution’s responsibility to provide the public with a truthful, multidimensional view of history. As the Smithsonian moves forward with its plans, it will likely face scrutiny from both supporters of the order and those who feel that the changes may compromise the integrity of historical education. The institution’s ability to navigate this challenge will shape the future of its role in American public life and its continued relevance in educating future generations about the complexities of history.

Shaping History: The Future of the Smithsonian Overhaul

Trump’s executive order to overhaul the Smithsonian Institution and “restore” American history is a move that is likely to shape the way future generations understand their country’s past. The decision to reframe American history through a more patriotic lens raises important questions about historical accuracy, political influence, and the role of museums in public education. While some view the order as a necessary corrective to what they see as a growing trend of historical revisionism, others worry about the potential for distorting history for ideological purposes.

As the Smithsonian navigates this challenge, its ability to maintain its commitment to scholarly rigor and impartiality will be key to ensuring that it continues to serve as a trusted source of education for all Americans. Ultimately, the outcome of this overhaul may not only impact how we understand history, but how we define our national identity moving forward.

This article is co-published with Social Sweethearts GmbH