This past summer, I had the incredible opportunity to intern at the American Museum of Natural History, where I engaged directly with visitors through dioramas and specimens to spark curiosity and conversation. Returning to the museum not just as a guest, but as an educator, after years of childhood visits, was a powerful full-circle moment.
For many New York City children, visiting the American Museum of Natural History and other museums like it is more than a field trip — it’s a formative experience that shapes their relationship with science and discovery. However, if we are not careful, the magic of museums may soon be a thing of the past.
Currently, museums, national parks and higher education institutions are under federal attack, yet another signifier of the rising “anti-intellectualism” movement in America.
The term “anti-intellectualism” was coined by historian Richard Hofstadter in his 1963 book “Anti-intellectualism in American Life.” Anti-intellectualism means exactly what it sounds like: the rejection of intellectuals, critical thinking and academic or scientific expertise, often involving the distrust of educational institutions like museums and universities.
The United States saw anti-intellectualism in practice as a symptom of the McCarthyism era of the 1940s and ’50s that resulted in the termination of professors across the country due to perceived communist affiliation. Famously, Chandler Davis, a professor of mathematics at the University of Michigan, served six months in federal prison after refusing to answer questions from the House Un-American Activities Committee about his political affiliation, despite his personal economic beliefs having no connection to the subject he taught.
Alarmingly, Red Scare-esque mindsets have begun to creep back into the American psyche, from COVID-19 conspiracy theories to book banning and, now, attacks on educational institutions.
As of Sept. 16, in the wake of March’s Executive Order 14253, titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” the Trump administration has directed several national park services to eliminate materials that address slavery and the oppression of Native Americans. This directive demands that national parks and museums dismantle what it calls “revisionist” history that portrays America as “inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed.”
At Fort Pulaski National Monument in Georgia, park staff were instructed to remove one of the most recognizable photos in American history, “The Scourged Back.” This photo depicts an escaped formerly enslaved man with lashing scars and has long been used in high school history classrooms across the country — an image burned into the dark subconscious that is American history.
While the identity of the man in the photo is debated, with some institutions identifying him as being named “Peter” and others referring to him as “Gordon,” we do know that the photo was taken in a Union encampment in Baton Rouge during a medical examination and became widely circulated, sparking public outrage. While we know some of his story through accounts from the time, the ambiguity surrounding his true name and identity — which may have been for his own safety — leaves much of his legacy to this singular picture.
Moreover, to erase this picture from American parks and museums is to erase this man from history almost entirely. Gordon/Peter was part of the Union army, and without men like him, many of us would not have the same liberties we have today. Therefore, erasing him is not just racist but also unpatriotic, antiveteran and anti-American. However, the issue of erasing U.S. history goes far beyond the suppression of this one photo.
The public-facing content, curatorial process, exhibition planning, collection use and narrative standards of eight Smithsonian museums, including the National Museum of American History, National Museum of Natural History and National Museum of African American History and Culture, are all set to be under review by the Trump administration, according to an August letter. The goal of these reviews is to create “a revitalized curatorial vision rooted in the strength, breadth, and achievements of the American story” — or in other words, “get rid of all the stuff that makes us look bad.”
The truth is, no country has a spotless, unproblematic history, and pretending one can be curated with malicious intent is the real act of revisionism and is objectively anti-intellectual.
Let’s be clear, politicians do not push this rhetoric because they are looking out for Americans. They push it because the uneducated and gullible masses are easier to manipulate, propagandize and radicalize. It is our duty, as individuals who value freedom and critical thought, to actively reject the creeping tide of anti-intellectualism that threatens to reduce us to docile bodies and an even more easily manipulated mass.
To fight the rise in anti-intellectualism, we must read banned books, question narratives and support museums.
Jordan Ori is a senior majoring in English and is Pipe Dream’s assistant opinions editor.
Views expressed in the opinions pages represent the opinions of the columnists. The only piece that represents the view of the Pipe Dream Editorial Board is the Staff Editorial.