President Donald Trump’s recent executive order targeting the Smithsonian Institution has ignited a firestorm of criticism from civil rights advocates, historians, and political leaders. The order, titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” accuses the Smithsonian of promoting a “divisive, race-centered ideology” and specifically names the National Museum of African American History and Culture (NMAAHC). Critics argue that this move is an attempt to sanitize the nation’s history and downplay the significance of racism in shaping the United States. citeturn0news12

The executive order empowers Vice President JD Vance, a member of the Smithsonian Institution Board of Regents, to review all exhibits and programs to ensure they uphold “shared American values” and do not “divide Americans based on race.” This directive has raised concerns about potential censorship and the suppression of important historical narratives that address the complexities of race relations in America. citeturn0news14

Historians like Clarissa Myrick-Harris of Morehouse College have expressed alarm, suggesting that the order could lead to a denial of the existence of slavery, Jim Crow laws, and racial violence against Black communities. Myrick-Harris emphasized the importance of acknowledging the full scope of American history, including its darker chapters, to foster understanding and progress. citeturn0search0

Civil rights organizations have also voiced strong opposition. Ibram X. Kendi, a renowned race historian and author, described the order as “a literal attack on Black America itself,” highlighting the NMAAHC as a vital institution that embodies the resilience and contributions of African Americans. Similarly, NAACP President Derrick Johnson criticized Trump’s attendance at the opening of the Mississippi Civil Rights Museum, calling it “an affront to the veterans of the civil rights movement” and citing the administration’s role in creating a “racially hostile climate.” citeturn0search0turn0search2

The controversy extends to the artistic community as well. Artists featured in Smithsonian exhibits, such as Roberto Lugo, have expressed concern over the potential censorship of art that addresses racial issues. Lugo emphasized the importance of confronting uncomfortable aspects of history through art to promote dialogue and understanding. citeturn0news13

Political figures have also weighed in. Texas Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett and U.S. Representative Steven Horsford condemned the executive order, underscoring the necessity of preserving truthful historical narratives and the role of institutions like the Smithsonian in educating the public about the nation’s complex past. citeturn0news13

The Smithsonian Institution, which receives a significant portion of its funding from the federal government, has yet to issue an official response to the executive order. As the debate unfolds, many are watching closely to see how this directive will impact the portrayal and understanding of American history, particularly concerning the experiences and contributions of African Americans.