A Designated Target: The Trumpian Siege on the Smithsonian’s Narrative

The recent retirement of Lonnie Bunch, the first Black secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, has sparked concern in the design community. His departure comes after a tumultuous year for the institution, marked by the Trump administration’s efforts to reshape its presentation of American history.

A White House report earlier this year accused officials within the National Museum of American History of promoting “radical activism” and presenting inaccurate information. This interventionist approach is consistent with the administration’s removals of arts administrators at the Kennedy Center. The potential impact on the Smithsonian’s role as a curator of national identity, however, sets this situation apart.

As one of the world’s most revered cultural institutions, the Smithsonian has long been tasked with preserving and presenting an inclusive, accurate representation of American history. The Trump administration’s efforts are less about “restoring” American greatness than imposing a partisan agenda on the cultural record.

In July, Trump issued an executive order directing the Museum of American History to post signs warning visitors that its exhibits contained inaccurate information. This move is reminiscent of other attempts by governments to control public discourse through manipulation of facts. Bunch rejected the White House report’s characterization of the Smithsonian’s mission as “unfair,” pointing out who gets to decide what constitutes an accurate representation of history.

The administration’s threat to cut federal funding for the Smithsonian in late August underscored its willingness to wield financial leverage as a means of control. This is not just about ideological difference; it’s about silencing voices that challenge dominant narratives and imposing a monolithic, White-centric interpretation of American history.

Bunch’s retirement can be seen less as a personal decision than as a strategic retreat from the fight. His commitment to preserving the Smithsonian’s mission has earned him praise from leaders like Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who lauded his pursuit of excellence in telling the nation’s story. This is not a commentary on Bunch’s leadership; it’s a testament to the enduring importance of the institution he leaves behind.

The Smithsonian’s struggle is part of a larger trend: an attempt to co-opt cultural institutions as instruments of partisan policy-making. Designers and writers would do well to take note, as our craft is being politicized. We have a responsibility to defend the integrity of our narratives.

As we watch this saga unfold, it’s clear that the Smithsonian’s fate will be closely tied to the outcome of this broader struggle. Will the institution emerge from this tumult unscathed? Or will Trump’s machinations lead to a fundamental shift in its mission – one that compromises its commitment to inclusivity and accuracy? Only time will tell, but one thing is certain: we can’t afford to sit idly by while our cultural heritage is rewritten at the whim of politicians. The Smithsonian may be just one front in this battle, but it’s a crucial one – for designers, writers, and anyone who cares about preserving the integrity of our shared history.