Legal expert calls for Smithsonian leadership overhaul over ‘self-loathing’ portrayal of history: ‘It’s bile’

Cully Stimson didn't mince words, and honestly, neither should we. Calling a museum exhibit "bile" is the kind of blunt reaction most Americans have when they walk through a taxpayer-funded institution and feel like they're being scolded rather than informed. The Smithsonian's National Museum of American History is supposed to tell the story of this country to its own citizens and to the world. If that story has curdled into a running apology for existing, that's not curation. That's ideology wearing a museum badge.

The specific target here is Anthea Hartig, and the specific complaint is a pattern, not a single exhibit. When the framing of American history consistently emphasizes shame over achievement, grievance over grit, you end up with a museum that feels more like a self-criticism session than a celebration of a messy, ambitious, remarkable nation. Kids on field trips deserve context and complexity, sure. They don't deserve a narrative that treats their country as something to be ashamed of just for existing.

Calling for a leadership change isn't censorship. It's accountability. These are public institutions funded by public money, and the people funding them get a say in whether the story being told matches reality or matches an agenda. If the Smithsonian wants to keep public trust and public funding, it might start by telling American history like it actually happened, warts and triumphs both, instead of picking a side and calling it scholarship.