Smithsonian Review Sparks Controversy
CNN commentator Scott Jennings has pushed back against alarmists regarding the White House’s ongoing review of content at the Smithsonian Museum. Interestingly, Jennings had previously expressed support for the destruction of certain monuments during the early 2020s.
The Trump administration is examining the Smithsonian ahead of America’s 250th anniversary, urging that national museums and exhibits “reflect the unity, progress, and enduring values that define America’s narrative.” This review particularly targets federally funded museums, which have been criticized for addressing the notion of “white dominant culture.”
In a letter to Ronnie Bunch III, officials from the Trump administration outlined a review process intended to align the Smithsonian’s presentation of American history with a more unifying perspective—essentially advocating for a removal of what they see as divisive or partisan narratives.
On CNN’s Newsnight, discussions around this initiative were heated, with Jennings emphasizing the importance of ensuring the upcoming celebration is overtly pro-American. Some panelists debated whether the focus on American achievements constitutes an act of omission regarding less favorable historical events. For example, one suggested that the National Air and Space Museum should spotlight the moon landing rather than the Challenger disaster from 1986.
Commentator Se Kup drew parallels to Russian strategies, comparing the Smithsonian review to changes made by Russia in Ukrainian museums. She raised the question of pride regarding Italian explorer Christopher Columbus and whether such emotions should take precedence in discussions about history.
Jennings further noted that those who lament the Smithsonian’s review often celebrated the tearing down of historical statues amid social unrest across the country. In rebuttal, D-FLA Rep. Maxwell Frost challenged Jennings, suggesting he was reluctant to criticize politicians who engage in “editing our history,” to which Jennings defended his stance, maintaining that there’s no editing occurring.
This situation exemplifies the deep divisions in America over how history is taught, particularly to younger generations. A notable example of this tension is the 1619 Project, led by Nicole Hannah-Jones from the New York Times. Critics have questioned its accuracy, even as the project has gained traction within school curriculums nationwide.
Recent years have seen heated debates, especially regarding the removal of statues honoring figureheads like Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Ulysses S. Grant. Following widespread discontent with Confederate leaders’ statues, some Democrats have sought to reassess historical representations, as evidenced by attempts to address the Andrew Jackson statue’s existence in Washington, D.C.
In July, New York City politician Zoran Mamdani faced backlash for advocating the removal of a Columbus statue, coinciding with nationwide protests over racial injustice. His historic take on Columbus sparked further debate over the symbols and narratives that define American history.
Controversies sparked by the Smithsonian include previously released guidelines that criticized what they deemed as traits of “whiteness” in significant cultural values. Certain suggestions—that values such as rationality and future planning represent a distinctly white American ethos—were met with ridicule and accusations of patronizing Black Americans.
