Lonnie Bunch III’s decision to retire from the Smithsonian at the end of 2026 is, on the surface, the departure of a distinguished historian who has spent decades building institutions devoted to telling America’s complicated story. But it is difficult to look at the timing without seeing something darker.
Bunch is leaving as the Smithsonian has become another battlefield in Donald Trump’s war over what Americans are permitted to remember.
The Trump administration has accused Smithsonian museums of presenting an excessively negative, divisive and “anti-American” version of the country’s history. It has demanded changes, threatened federal support and sought greater influence over exhibitions. Bunch, the institution’s first Black secretary, has defended the basic proposition that history is not patriotic propaganda.
That proposition should not be controversial. America’s history contains triumph and tragedy, invention and exploitation, emancipation and slavery, constitutional idealism and racial exclusion. To remove the unpleasant chapters does not make the country stronger. It makes its history less true.
And this is where Bunch’s departure becomes symbolic. Trump’s greatest political achievement has not necessarily been changing laws. It has been changing the atmosphere in which institutions operate. A president does not always need to fire everybody who disagrees with him. Sometimes it is enough to make disagreement exhausting, expensive and professionally dangerous.
That is how institutional independence can slowly disappear. One resignation rarely destroys democracy. Neither does one museum exhibit, one executive order or one political attack. The danger comes from accumulation: one institution pressured, another intimidated, another leadership position politicized, another independent voice deciding that fighting has become too costly.
Eventually the defenders do not necessarily lose because they are defeated. They leave. That is why the 2026 midterms matter so enormously. A Democratic victory in the House, Senate or both would not magically restore the American political system to health. Nor would it automatically stop Trump. Presidents possess substantial executive authority, and a hostile Congress can itself become dysfunctional. But congressional control would change the equation dramatically.
A Democratic House could investigate, subpoena and expose. A Democratic Senate could block or complicate appointments and force greater scrutiny of executive actions. Congressional committees could become places where government decisions are examined rather than simply endorsed.
Most importantly, a congressional majority would restore something that has been conspicuously missing: institutional resistance.
The question, therefore, is not whether Democrats can somehow “control” Trump. The more important question is whether Congress will once again behave like a separate branch of government.
That distinction matters. Trump has repeatedly demonstrated that he understands political power as something to be exercised, not politely shared. Expecting him voluntarily to respect boundaries because tradition says presidents should do so is not a strategy. It is wishful thinking.
But Congress has constitutional powers. Courts have constitutional powers. States have powers. Civil society has powers. Universities, museums, journalists and voters have powers. Democracy is not protected by one heroic individual standing in front of the gates. It is protected by institutions refusing, collectively, to move the gates.
Bunch’s departure should therefore be regarded neither as proof that Trump has conquered everything nor as an insignificant personnel change. It is a warning about what happens when political pressure becomes normal.
The midterms offer Americans a chance to answer that warning. If Democrats win both chambers, Trump may discover that the American presidency still has walls around it.
If they lose, the Smithsonian may not be the last institution asking how much independence it can surrender before independence becomes merely a historical exhibit.
And that would be the cruelest irony of all: a museum built to preserve America’s history becoming one of the places where Americans learned how quickly history can be rewritten.
No comments:
Post a Comment