Recently, conservative CNN contributor Scott Jennings put the spotlight on Democrats who criticize President Trump’s auditing of the Smithsonian Museums. He argued that the same individuals raising alarms about this review once cheered on the destruction of historical monuments. Jennings pointed out that these critics have little ground to stand on, given their past reactions to the tearing down of statues. He cited the removal of Thomas Jefferson’s statue from the New York City Council Chamber in 2021 as a blatant example of efforts to erase history.
In a thought-provoking discussion, Jennings remarked, “The last time we sort of talked about the changing of historical exhibits was when all these angry mobs all over the country tore down historical statues.” This comment highlights a disconnect in the narrative pushed by some on the left. He stated that the loudest voices condemning the Smithsonian review were previously supportive of those very acts of destruction. Jennings maintained that the Trump administration’s review is aimed at ensuring that, as America approaches its 250th anniversary, museum content reflects “the unity, progress, and enduring values that define the American story.”
His co-panelist, S.E. Cupp, reacted strongly by likening the review to Russian manipulation within Ukrainian cultural institutions. Cupp also articulated her pride in historical figures such as Christopher Columbus when questioned about the removal of his statue. Responses like these often reveal the complexity of public sentiment surrounding historical narratives, with individuals drawing lines based on personal identity and cultural pride.
Jennings’s assertion that Democrats “have no leg to stand on” in their critiques is underscored by an apparent hypocrisy within their ranks when it comes to discussions of history. In this light, Jennings shines a light on the inconsistency of values that have been demonstrated in political debates surrounding historical representation. This discord raises important questions about who gets to dictate the narrative of America’s past and the implications of altering such narratives for society as a whole.
As evidenced in recent data, there seems to be a broader cultural conversation about history and its representation, often swayed by temporary political movements. Jennings’s challenge to the critics is a reminder that history itself should be preserved and presented accurately, rather than reshaped to fit the whims of political narratives.
"*" indicates required fields
