Is Trump seeking to erase the US as we have known it?

1. 82

   Credence2posted 4 weeks ago

   https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr … nstitution
   
   So, educate yourself!
   
   Article excerpt:
   
   “The attack on the IMLS is only the latest episode of the Trump presidency’s attempt to privatize information while replacing authentic history with a version more to its liking. As internet archivists race to back up the nation’s files and records, Trump administration officials have been systematically purging government websites in real time of the tools, concepts and language we need to act as informed citizens. In response to secretary of defense Pete Hegseth’s order to remove “diversity” content from the department’s platforms, the Pentagon took down pages about the Holocaust, September 11, cancer awareness and suicide prevention. So too, the Department of Agriculture deleted entire datasets and resources that farmers relied on to identify ways of coping with heat waves, droughts, floods and wildfires. Websites belonging to the Small Business Administration and Arlington National Cemetery scrubbed their platforms of photographs and references to women, LGBTQ+ individuals and people of color, including facts about American heroes such as Jackie Robinson or Gen Colin Powell.”
   
   So, I ask all the “smarty pants” righties, why is Trump doing this? And don’t tell me he is not or attempt to rationalize or apologize, this information is confirmed by many reputable journalist sites.

   replyreport
   1. 82

      Credence2posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

      Conservatives are always harping about DEI and all this and that. What  does removing the contributions of Colin Powell for example from national records of notable Americans  have to do with any of that? All of this while retaining the recognition for white males.
      
      Should I be surprised that the Conservative community avoids providing an answer?
      
      Everybody says that I should give Trump a chance, why should I? By erasing their contributions to this country, he has shown raw contempt for me and mine. What other explanation can explain this outside of pure racism? That means that I am within my rights to pummel Trump into non existence in any way that I can and influence those with whom I associate to do the same.

      replyreport
2. 60

   Willowarborposted 4 weeks ago

   Trump just signed an order to purge the Smithsonian of “improper ideology.”.   Are you kidding me?? The new executive order calls for “restoring truth and sanity” to U.S. history.
   But the truth it wants to “restore”?
   
   Translation: erase Black history, whitewash colonialism, and turn museums into MAGA propaganda halls....This isn’t about protecting history.
   It’s about rewriting it.  Love to see how MAGA'S will spin this unabashed fascist move.
   
   https://apnews.com/article/trump-smiths … 1a4b06ed4d

   replyreport
   1. 82

      Credence2posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

      Well, the Nazi burned books from Jewish authors with no regard for its content as having any value. They may well have dismissed Einstein allowing the allies to acquire the nuclear bomb first.
      
      After listening to all the flowery oratory from those that will defend Trump to the last, I am waiting for an explanation from the conservative community regarding this. I cant see how to extract a “why” from any of them leaving me with the only conclusion possible, and it is not pretty. They wont bother to spin it, but will run and hide like insect vermin under their respective floorboards once you turn the kitchen light on. It is quite telling, believe me.

      replyreport
3. 87

   Sharlee01posted 4 weeks ago

   Cred, I gave this ne a lot of thought... So, here is my view.
   
   Trump’s actions, particularly regarding the Smithsonian and cultural institutions, can be understood as part of a broader ideological struggle for control over how American history, values, and identity are portrayed. For Trump and his supporters, this is a response to what they see as a growing tide of progressive, left-leaning narratives that distort or diminish the positive aspects of the nation’s past. Trump has long argued that American history, particularly in terms of its founding principles, is being misrepresented in schools, museums, and the media. His belief is that many institutions have been overtaken by a "woke" culture that emphasizes the country’s flaws—such as slavery, racism, and inequality—while underplaying its achievements and the values upon which it was built. By targeting institutions like the Smithsonian, Trump wants to ensure that future generations are taught an American history that focuses on unity, national pride, and the positive contributions of historical figures, even if some of those figures had complicated legacies.
   
   His push to reinstate monuments to Confederate figures and his focus on removing what he calls "improper ideology" is rooted in his broader concern that the current political climate is too eager to erase or alter American symbols and figures that some groups deem offensive. He perceives this as an attack on the cultural fabric of the nation. For Trump and his supporters, these monuments represent a historical reality, and their removal is seen as an effort to rewrite history in a way that erases the country’s past. The debate about Confederate statues, for example, is often framed not as an endorsement of slavery but as a question of heritage versus progress. Trump’s view aligns with those who feel that the country’s history should be honored, not altered by political correctness or modern-day sensibilities.
   
   At the heart of Trump’s actions is a desire to return to what he sees as a more traditional or conservative set of values, one that celebrates American exceptionalism and the virtues of the country’s founding ideals. He believes that institutions like the Smithsonian have, over time, become too influenced by liberal ideologies, promoting narratives that emphasize division rather than unity. By implementing policies that he believes will correct this, Trump is trying to realign the country’s cultural institutions with what he views as the true American story. He sees this as part of his broader mission to challenge the cultural establishment, which he feels has increasingly taken on a more progressive, divisive tone.
   
   In many ways, Trump’s approach is about a cultural rebellion against what he perceives as the domination of left-wing ideologies in American life. His base of support sees him as a champion who is unafraid to confront what they view as the liberal elite’s control over public discourse. The Smithsonian initiative is just one of many examples where Trump is attempting to shape cultural and historical narratives in a way that resonates with his political vision. For Trump, these actions are about more than just changing museum exhibits—they represent a fight for the soul of the nation’s identity.

   replyreport
   1. 82

      Credence2posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

      Am most eloquent commentary, kudos to you for going where even angels fear to tread.
      
      However, this remains
      
      
      "Websites belonging to the Small Business Administration and Arlington National Cemetery scrubbed their platforms of photographs and references to women, LGBTQ+ individuals and people of color, including facts about American heroes such as Jackie Robinson or Gen Colin Powell.”
      
      What does Trump policy have to do by expunging the contributions of women and people of color? What am I suppose to make of that? Does his rewriting of American history involve making note of the contribution of white males only?
      
      From my perspective, the John Wayne depictions do not tell the entire story and yes, America is guilty of actions contrary to the values it so proudly professes. Trumps revision involves expunging aspects of American history, and they are quite stark, inconsistent with its stated credo.
      
      As for the Confederacy, I don't see Germans putting up statues of Hitler or Goebbels. While Jeff Davis and Robert E. Lee are part of American history as advocates of succession and disunion, why do they get a heroes treatment while removing so much as a mention of non-whites in its place?
      
      The entire rightwing approach is to minimize the contractictions, such as DeSantis' comments last summer that slavery was jobs training program. Is that really the truth? Is this the kind of stuff you want to teach children? There was NOTHING beneficial about being a slave.
      
      There has never been unity here due to American cultural and economic realities, that needs to be understood. We are only the same based on our nationality and where we live. Trumps revisions will appeal to white folks only, you can be assured of that.
      
      After all of this I still don't see what that has to do with expunging contributions by non white people. That, in itself, is divisive and is seen by me as such.

      replyreport
      1. 87

         Sharlee01posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

         This argument makes several broad claims about Trump’s approach to history and policy that don’t fully align with reality. First, the idea that Trump’s policies involve "expunging the contributions of women and people of color" isn’t grounded in any specific actions he has taken. His policies have largely focused on curbing what he sees as ideological distortions in education, not erasing history. I admit he has pushed back against certain narratives in academic settings that frame America primarily as a nation built on oppression, but that’s a far cry from erasing the contributions of non-white Americans.
         
         Regarding historical revisionism, every administration shapes the way history is taught and interpreted. The left has certainly done so by emphasizing systemic racism and colonialism as defining characteristics of America’s past. Trump, on the other hand, has emphasized patriotism and American exceptionalism. That doesn’t mean ignoring the flaws in American history—it means resisting a version of history that portrays the country as fundamentally immoral. There is room for debate about how history should be taught, but it’s misleading to claim that Trump wants to erase non-white contributions altogether.
         
         The comparison between Confederate statues and Nazi Germany is a common one, but it overlooks key differences. Germany underwent a complete political and cultural transformation after World War II, whereas America had to reintegrate the South after the Civil War. That’s why Confederate leaders were not executed but rather allowed to play roles in rebuilding the country. Statues of figures like Robert E. Lee were often erected as symbols of Southern heritage, not as endorsements of slavery. Whether or not those statues should remain is a fair debate, but removing them doesn’t equate to replacing them with non-white historical figures. I can certainly see such monuments could make some very uncomfortable.
         
         As for DeSantis’ comments about slavery, they may have been taken out of context. The curriculum he referenced included a broader discussion of how enslaved people developed skills that some later used to build successful lives post-emancipation. That’s not the same as saying slavery was a "jobs training program." It’s reasonable to argue that certain language should be more carefully chosen, but the outrage over this particular point was largely driven by political spin.
         
         The claim that Trump’s approach to history will “appeal to white folks only” is a generalization that ignores the growing number of minorities who support him. His focus on national unity and American pride resonates with many Americans across racial lines. The assumption that only white people would appreciate a more patriotic historical narrative is, ironically, a divisive perspective itself. Instead of assuming ill intent, the conversation should be about how to present history in a way that acknowledges both America’s faults and its accomplishments. Would this not be more appropriate?

         replyreport
         1. 82

            Credence2posted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

            Yes, they created the correction at the public’s outcry, but why was it contemplated and accomplished in the first place? As being head of the departments, does this not reflect a specific action from this administration? What is the mindset behind this?
            
            https://www.facebook.com/ebonymag/posts … 272501287/
            
            Just because America is a nation built on racism and oppression it would be natural for Trump and rightwingers to attempt to erase the contributions of non WASPs, as contrary voices.
            
            Administrations are not the guardians of history, that belongs to educational scholars not to the Trump administration using a Hitler like model, removing all non-Aryan aspects from within their society on an edict.
            
            In my opinion, racism and colonialism are contrary to any idea of patriotism and exceptionalism. It is one or the other and while I cannot change the past I want the truth and not some sort of whitewashed version of things. I can at least ask for that and expunging records of non-white contributors from American history promotes the racism and colonialism aspects and that in itself is divisive and will remain so for most of US.
            
            What is a mere flaw to you is of a canyon’s significance for me.
            
            Was not the Civil War the equivalent of a cultural and political transformation in the United States? It is was only on the grace of Abraham Lincoln that Confederate leaders were not wholesale executed, but Jefferson Davis was jailed. Studying history, you should know that former confederate ringleaders were removed from serving in Congress during the Reconstruction period. So, they were not just integrated into the US. Andrew Johnson sympathized with Southern rebels, but again he was almost impeached by Radical Republicans, when Republicans were still the good guys.
            
            Southern heritage allows us to support secession advocacy of enslaving people against their will to line their own pockets. I live here in the South, regrettably , and that so called heritage is promoted only by whites, that still believed in the “Lost Cause”. Blacks which are numerous here say BS. What about their ideas of “heritage”? I say that the statues of the Confederate leaders be removed as a point of contention as to why are they heroes? I did not say to replace them with anything, but why should traitors be given a ticker tape parade? Their stone likenesses should be relegated to museums only. Can we not honor people who supported and enhanced American society rather than commit treason against it?
            
            Why does everyone try to sanitize DeSantis comments? It is a known fact that it was an attempt at anti-woke minimizing the realities of slavery searching desperately for some justification where there is none. Who would think that I would not know better? This is a form of whitewashing history. That is what DeSantis said verbatim, so it is not political spin. Why emphasize a virtually insignificant consolation to a heinous practice as a benefit?
            
            trump approach appeals to white persons only as only they would find comfort in expunging the contributions of non-whites, at least far too many of them anyway. Who outside of their group would? The stuff about American pride and unity is a well worn platitude that disguises what lies just immediately below the veneer.
            
            Trump has not shown interest in promoting both sides just the side that is comfortable to right wing oriented Americans, that America can do no wrong and what wrong that it did do was just a blip in history. I beg to differ.
            \

            replyreport