logo
Trump's White Nationalist Vision for the Future of History

Trump's White Nationalist Vision for the Future of History

Yahooa day ago
To be a historian in the time of Trump 2.0 is to teach and write history at a time when the federal government is being mobilized to promote a white nationalist version of American history. Plenty of previous politicians offered tacit sympathies for white nationalist ideas with coded terms like 'states' rights' and 'law and order,' but we have to journey back over one hundred years, to the presidency of Woodrow Wilson, to find an executive branch so supportive of white nationalist ideologies in the study of American history.
A white nationalist vision of American history is one that centers the role of white Americans above all others and, in fact, typically treats the history of the nation and the race as one and the same. For white nationalists, the United States is a nation created and founded by white people, and American history necessarily spurns the contributions of all other groups. The sins of slavery, segregation, and violence are excused as minor blemishes made along a path toward greatness. It was the accomplishments of America's great white men, we are led to believe, that brought us the prosperity for which we should all be so thankful. To question them—even if they enslaved, raped, and killed for power, expansion, or wealth—would be to question America itself.
Various versions of this story exist. For decades, the most pervasive version of this mythology lived in the American South. From practically the day after the Civil War, white Southerners crafted a white nationalist morality tale—in popular culture, veterans' organizations, and the Lost Cause ideology—of lazy Black slaves with generous white masters who in the 1860s did their best to fight off a war of 'Northern Aggression' that threatened white Southern freedom. For most of the twentieth century, this story was advanced by groups like the United Daughters of the Confederacy, or UDC—activists who dedicated much of their lives to celebrating white Confederate heritage. They published textbooks, erected monuments, and led public ceremonies honoring the legacy of the Southern white men who tried to destroy the United States.
Meanwhile, Black historians such as W.E.B. Du Bois and John Hope Franklin were literally segregated from the archives, banned from studying in Southern libraries because they were Black. When Franklin went to an archive to conduct research, he recalled, 'My arrival created a panic and an emergency among the administrators…. The archivist frankly informed me that I was the first Negro who had sought to use the facilities there.' Black people were not supposed to be in the archives, let alone be in charge of telling America's history.
Since American public universities fully desegregated in the 1960s, historians of different backgrounds have thoroughly dispelled the Southern Lost Cause and other white nationalist mythologies. These historians see more nuance in Founding Fathers who called for freedom even as they enslaved humans. As Franklin explained of his groundbreaking book, From Slavery to Freedom: A History of African Americans, 'My challenge was to weave into the fabric of American history enough of the presence of blacks so that the story of the United States could be told adequately and fairly.' Subsequent decades of cutting-edge research have rescued millions of nonwhite actors from the margins—Native Americans, African Americans, Asian Americans, Latinos, and more—showing that they also played major roles in the formation of the United States. In other words, America wasn't just built by white people. The struggles of millions, not only the brilliance of a select white few, are what made possible American affluence and endurance.The good news is that today, in spite of Trump's efforts, historians are telling more complete stories, ones that don't rely on half-baked truths, veiled hypocrisies, or a racially segregated professoriat. And the public is hungry for works that offer a more complete retelling of the American experience. Buoyed by the Black Lives Matter movement, African American history in particular has surged in popularity. From bestselling Black history books like The Warmth of Other Suns to The New York Times' 1619 Project to the explosively popular genre of Black historical fiction and film, African American history is now enmeshed in popular culture as never before. Books like James and films like Sinners center the Black experience, drawing millions of readers and viewers yearning for Black stories from the past. The murder of George Floyd in 2020 created a tidal wave of white sympathy for the African American experience. Amid such demand, the federal government and so many of America's institutions, from the Smithsonian to the National Football League, responded with efforts to better teach and study the history of race in America. Juneteenth finally became a federal holiday in 2021.
Trump 2.0 seeks a reversal of all of these strides toward a pluralistic history. The new Trump administration is staking claims to racial morality by stressing the excesses of and seeking to destroy diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI, programs that multiplied in the wake of George Floyd. The administration cannot make Americans uninterested in the history of race, nor can it turn back a cultural marketplace that offers serious profits for great stories about race in America. But it can use the tools of the state to influence, even poison, how history will be taught in America's public forums and schools.
On Juneteenth, the federal holiday established after George Floyd to commemorate Emancipation, Trump decided against issuing a formal holiday greeting, choosing instead to argue that America had too many holidays that took away from economic productivity. Of all the federal holidays to dismiss, of course it was the one expressly dedicated to a Black cause.
Trump's new administration is openly scrubbing historical government websites of Black and Brown people, removing references to American heroes like Medgar Evers, the Navajo Code Talkers, and the trailblazing female veterans, while also promising to restore the names of Confederates to military bases. Fort Bragg, originally named after a white supremacist Confederate general before being renamed Fort Liberty in 2023, has once again been renamed Fort Bragg (although it's now cynically named for a different Bragg, a World War II soldier).
On Juneteenth, the federal holiday established after George Floyd to commemorate Emancipation, Trump decided against issuing a formal holiday greeting, choosing instead to argue that America had too many holidays that took away from economic productivity. Of all the federal holidays to dismiss, of course it was the one expressly dedicated to a Black cause. A Trump executive order in March called for citizens' support in 'advancing the policy of this order,' in other words, reporting federal historical sites that spend too much time focusing on the perspectives of nonwhites. The UDC would be proud. In fact, one historian of Civil War memory noted that Trump's Black History Month Proclamation 'reads as if it was released from the headquarters of the United Daughters of the Confederacy.'These approaches to history resurrect some of the very same failed historical arguments made by white nationalist groups of the past. And so part of being a historian during Trump 2.0 is to witness a renewal of debunked mythologies and outdated ideas made fresh by a state apparatus deeply invested in protecting the historical reputation of whiteness.
And yet, Trump 2.0's flawed and racist approach to history will probably offer little in the way of substantive change for serious historical study. The Trump allies promoting censorship are only interested in prevention, not innovative creation, ceding the field to those of us who really do care about honest history. And unfortunately for Trump and his supporters, the censors can't reach everywhere. Knowledge today comes from many quarters. Millions of students may be blocked from learning American history in public school classrooms, but the Trump administration cannot completely block them from accessing American history from other venues. Today's censors will never again enjoy the same stranglehold that white nationalists once had on the production of the past. Even if an eighth grader in South Carolina is blocked from studying Frederick Douglass in their classroom, state laws cannot prevent them from accessing additional information online, in film, or in podcasts.
Oddly enough, Trump 2.0 has also created opportunities for better understanding the history of race in America. It can be difficult for modern students to fully appreciate the intensity with which people fought over race in previous eras of American history. Across the country, even in the North, everyday white citizens were willing to go so far as to bomb school buses to stop the desegregation of elementary schools. Students struggle to understand the motivations of people like the women screaming at Black teenagers at Little Rock Central High School in 1957 or the activists who shouted, 'Don't wait for your daughter to be raped by these Congolese. Don't wait until the burrheads are forced into your schools. Do something about it now,' in order to intimidate six-year-old Ruby Bridges when she entered the first grade in 1960 New Orleans.
I have been teaching those ugly episodes for years, but the reactions of my students this spring were different than ever before. Students now recognize their present in the past. There was a time when the sight of adults screaming at school board meetings might have appeared very foreign. Now, that's just part of America's political culture. The incivility of the present helps us to understand the ugliness of the past.
Perhaps the greatest consequence of Trump's second term will be the retardation of America's ability to have a true national reckoning on race. The United States has not deeply explored its own racial history with an eye toward a constructive public process of reconciliation. Historians argue that such a reckoning, if done well, would hold the promise to help us break free from the cancerous orbit of race that has poisoned life in America since its founding. The ancient hope of that reconciliation is precisely what Trumpism and its enablers intend to prevent. After a brief moment when some historians began discussing the possibility of a 'Third Reconstruction,' Trump 2.0 brings the full force of the federal government against that promise, erasing Black and Brown histories from public display and recentering white voices above all others so as to align with the white nationalist fairy tale that they tell themselves is America.
Solve the daily Crossword
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Europe's concerns may be getting through as White House reframes Trump-Putin summit
Europe's concerns may be getting through as White House reframes Trump-Putin summit

Yahoo

time16 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Europe's concerns may be getting through as White House reframes Trump-Putin summit

It's beginning to feel like "Midnight Sun" diplomacy. In parts of Alaska, the sun doesn't set in summer, casting light through the night but leaving you disorientated. Ukraine latest: Zelenskyy reject's Putin's proposal The Trump-Putin summit is pitched as "transparent" but it's difficult to find any path to peace right now. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt has reduced it to a "listening exercise" where will seek a "better understanding" of the situation. There isn't much to understand - Russia wants territory, Ukraine isn't ceding it - but Ms Levitt rejects talk of them "tempering expectations". It's possible to be both hopeful and measured, she says, because Mr Trump wants peace but is only meeting one side on Friday. It's the fact that he's only meeting that concerns European leaders, who fear Ukraine could be side-lined by any Trump-Putin pact. claims Mr Putin wants the rest of Donetsk and, in effect, the entire Donbas region in eastern Ukraine. He's ruled out surrendering that because it would rob him of key defence lines and leave Kyiv vulnerable to future offensives. European leaders - including Sir Keir Starmer - will hold online talks with Mr Zelenskyy twice on Wednesday, on either side of a virtual call with Mr Trump and US Vice President . Their concerns may be getting through, hence the White House now framing the summit as a cautious fact-finding exercise and nothing more. The only thing we really learned from the latest news conference is that the first Trump-Putin meeting in six years will be in Anchorage. Alaska itself, with its history and geography, is a layered metaphor: a place the Russians sold to the US in the 1800s. Read more: A remote but strategic frontier where the lines of ownership and the rules of negotiation are once again being sketched out. On a clear day, you can see Russia from Alaska, but without Mr Zelenskyy in the room, it's difficult to see them conquering any summit. In the place where the sun never sets, the deal might never start.

Trump's unusual deal with Nvidia and AMD sparks concerns, legal questions
Trump's unusual deal with Nvidia and AMD sparks concerns, legal questions

Los Angeles Times

time17 minutes ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Trump's unusual deal with Nvidia and AMD sparks concerns, legal questions

President Trump struck an unusual deal with Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices that allows the companies to sell certain chips to China in exchange for giving the U.S. government a 15% cut of those sales. But the unprecedented agreement also has raised concerns from politicians and legal experts over whether the deal is legal and would pose a national security threat. Questions also linger about exactly how the deal, which was announced Monday, would work because the U.S. Constitution bars taxes on exports, although some experts said Trump could find a workaround. The U.S. government might receive $3 billion from the revenue split if China's demand for Nvidia's H20 chip — which is less powerful than the company's highest-end artificial intelligence chip — reaches $20 billion, according to a note from Bernstein Research. 'It ties the fate of this chip manufacturer in a very particular way to this administration that is quite rare,' said Julia Powles, a professor and executive director of the UCLA Institute for Technology, Law & Policy. Trump's agreement with the world's most valuable company could put pressure on other tech companies and major exporters to strike similar deals with the U.S. government, but it's still unclear what the implications will be internationally, she said. The deal is the latest example of how tech companies are seeking to curry favor with the Trump administration, which has threatened to impose tariffs on semiconductor companies that don't commit to investing in the United States. Apple faced potential tariffs as well, but committed to investing $100 billion more in U.S. manufacturing after Trump criticized the company for expanding iPhone production in India. Trump also placed restrictions in April around the export of certain AI chips, including Nvidia's H20 and AMD's MI308, over national security concerns. He's called for the resignation of Intel Chief Executive Lip-Bu Tan, who has faced scrutiny over his reported investments in Chinese companies, but changed his tune after meeting the executive this week. Democratic and Republican lawmakers have criticized the idea that tech companies should split their sales with the U.S. government in exchange for export licenses that allow them to resume chip sales in China. 'Export controls are a frontline defense in protecting our national security, and we should not set a precedent that incentivizes the Government to grant licenses to sell China technology that will enhance its AI capabilities,' Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), the chair of the House Select Committee on China, said in a statement. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, (D-Ill.), a ranking member of that committee, said in a statement that the deal raises questions about its legality and how the funds will be used. 'The administration cannot simultaneously treat semiconductor exports as both a national security threat and a revenue opportunity,' he said. 'By putting a price on our security concerns, we signal to China and our allies that American national security principles are negotiable for the right fee.' The White House didn't answer questions about the agreement. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Tuesday that 'the legality of it, the mechanics of it, is still being ironed out by the Department of Commerce.' On Monday, Trump defended the deal with Nvidia, stating that the H20 chips are 'obsolete' and less powerful than the company's more high-end Blackwell chip. At a news conference, Trump said he met with Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang and initially asked for a 20% revenue split but they came down to 15%. 'We negotiate a little deal,' Trump said. 'So he's selling a essentially old chip.' Trump's remarks came after a report from the Financial Times over the weekend that Nvidia and AMD would pay 15% of their China chip revenue to the U.S. government. AMD didn't respond to a request for comment. An Nvidia spokesperson said in a statement that the company hasn't shipped H20 chips to China for months but it hopes that easing export restrictions will 'let America compete in China and worldwide.' 'America cannot repeat 5G and lose telecommunication leadership. America's AI tech stack can be the world's standard if we race.' For Nvidia, the stakes are high. Huang said in a May interview with Stratechery, a newsletter and podcast, that the Chinese market is about $50 billion a year. Restricting H20 chip sales means that the company is walking away from profits that could be used to compete with China in the race to dominate AI. Taylar Rajic, an associate fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said she's skeptical that legal concerns would halt the arrangement because it's unclear who would sue. 'I can't identify who would bring that suit forward,' she said. 'It wouldn't be Nvidia because they're the ones who negotiated this deal.' Meanwhile, Chinese officials have their own fears that Nvidia's chips could have location tracking or remote shutdown capabilities, though the company has denied those accusations. 'China obviously has its own concerns and its own national security considerations that it wants to take into account,' Rajic said. 'It just depends on whether or not they want to buy it from us too.'

Controversial Princeton prof with Iran ties steps down amid criticism from dissidents, senators
Controversial Princeton prof with Iran ties steps down amid criticism from dissidents, senators

New York Post

time17 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Controversial Princeton prof with Iran ties steps down amid criticism from dissidents, senators

A controversial Princeton professor with strong ties to the Iranian regime has quietly stepped down from the Ivy League school, following a campaign from dissidents to remove him. Seyed Hossein Mousavian, a Middle East security and nuclear policy specialist, retired from his position after 15 years as the head of the school's Program on Science and Global Security on June 1, according to an announcement listing retiring employees on Princeton's website. The professor is controversial for being heavily involved in Iran's chemical and nuclear programs beginning in 2004, long before the country was known to have been building up its nuclear arsenal, according to Swiss journalist Bruno Schirra. Advertisement 4 Seyed Hossain Mousavian, an Iranian security specialist, quietly stepped down from Princeton University after 15 years and amid a federal crackdown on alleged antisemitism at the school. Getty Images The move comes amid the news Princeton could lose more than $200 million in grants from the Trump administration for not tackling antisemitism on campus, The Post has learned. Iranian opposition activists as well as Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz, a Princeton alumnus, had long urged the school to fire Mousavian. Advertisement 4 The Trump administration reportedly paused the payment of more than $200 million in grants. to the Ivy League school amid allegations of antisemitism. LightRocket via Getty Images 'It's a victory, but one has to wonder if he's staying behind the scenes somehow,' said Lawdan Bazargan, a former political prisoner in Iran, a human rights activist and member of the US-based Alliance Against Islamic Regime of Iran Apologists. The group has waged a two-year campaign to get the university to ditch Mousavian. 'We exposed the truth,' the group said in a press release last week. 'Mousavian is not a neutral scholar but a former ambassador of the [Islamic Republic of Iran] who defended the fatwas to kill author Salman Rushdie. Advertisement 4 Former Iranian Kurdish leader Sadiq Sharafkindi (left) and Nuri Dehkordi were two of the four opposition politicians killed in the Berlin restaurant Mykonos in 1992, while Mousavian was Iranian ambassador to Germany. Associated Press Shirin Ebadi, a former Iranian judge who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2003, has also previously accused Mousavian of supporting the fatwa. Before being hired by Princeton in 2009, Mousavian had also worked as a diplomat and editor of the Tehran Times, the English-language newspaper which is a mouthpiece for the regime. Mousavian was also Iran's ambassador to Germany in 1992 when four dissidents were murdered in the back of a restaurant in Berlin. Advertisement The group of dissidents which campaigned to get him fired from Princeton has previously alleged when Mousavian was ambassador to Germany, 23 Iranians were killed in Europe for being enemies of the mullahs. In 1997, a German court concluded that the Iranian leadership, including the foreign ministry, masterminded the murders and that the headquarters for plotting them was the Iranian embassy, but did not name Mousavian. During the trial, German newspaper Tagesspiegel reported a former Iranian spy, Abolghasem Mesbahi, said under oath, 'Mousavian was involved in most of the crimes that took place in Europe. 4 Former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad tours a nuclear facility in 2008. The country's nuclear program is much older than many Western intelligence sources had predicted. AP 'Specifically, in Germany, it concerns the crimes that were committed against Iranian opposition members.' Following the trial Mousavian was called back to Tehran. Mousavian, whose Princeton email address is still active and who is still prominently featured on the school's website, did not return a request for comment Tuesday. He wrote of his retirement on Twitter: 'After 15 years of service at Princeton University, I retired at my own request at the end of May 2025. Advertisement 'I am deeply grateful to the university officials for their support and especially for their commitment to freedom of expression.' The retirement coincides with the imminent publication of a 2004 interview with Mousavian by Schirra. The interview, which is now being published by the Middle East Research Institute, a US-based nonprofit that studies extremism, suggests Iran's nuclear program was secretly active for decades before Western intelligence sources warned of its existence. Advertisement 'After Iraq's attack [in 1980], we announced our defensive chemical and nuclear programs,' said Mousavian in the interview, who was then deputy of Iran's National Security Council. In April, Cruz urged the school to fire Mousavian, saying: 'His presence at Princeton makes students feel justifiably afraid for their safety.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store