Earlier this month, the North Carolina Museum of Art announced a “Drag Queen Story Hour” for children as young as 2 years old. Funded in part by taxpayer dollars, this event “capture[s] the imagination and play of the gender fluidity of childhood and gives kids glamorous, positive, and unabashedly queer role models.”
Though canceled after community protests, this event is indicative of a deep ideological bias that seems to have taken over the museum world. Indeed, 89% of museum directors and 94% of museum curators are Democrats, according to a study published by the data group Verdant Labs, which sourced Federal Elections Commission data.
Museums were not always plagued by political bias. Until the late 18th century, museums were private and hosted the collections of wealthy individuals. Characterized by rigorous scientific, political, and philosophical discourse, the Enlightenment era pulled society away from religious inquiry toward the humanistic pursuit of knowledge. This created a citizenry, regardless of class, that became curious about human history, creating an interest in public museums.
The Louvre became the first public museum in 1793, providing free access to former French royal collections for people of all social classes. Museums quickly spread throughout Europe and became a popular pastime. As Europe emerged from the Enlightenment into modernity, postmodern ideologies began to take hold and change the public perception of museums. The anti-imperialist movement, for example, emerged in Europe during the late 19th century. Museums began to receive criticism for their “colonial roots” and “stolen artifacts.” Ideological movements targeting museums have only increased in the 21st century due to the rise of progressive liberalism, anti-racism, and pro-LGBT movements.
The museum was once an ideologically neutral space meant to teach about the history of human civilization. However, the International Council of Museums recently redefined what a museum is, claiming museums exist to make sure our “heritage … [is] accessible and inclusive … foster[s] diversity and sustainability.”
A focus on diversity and sustainability, paired with a deep ideological bias, often creates misleading exhibits. President James Madison’s Montpelier home, for example, has received criticism for its disproportionate focus on slavery. As a key Founding Father and author of the Federalist Papers and Bill of Rights, Madison was instrumental in the ratification of the Constitution. He was also the only commander in chief to lead troops while in office during the War of 1812.
However, according to a recent report by the Heritage Foundation, “Visitors could leave Montpelier knowing … little about Madison and his great work as America’s political philosopher.” There are no displays dedicated to Madison’s accomplishments. Instead, Montpelier’s focus is slavery. An exhibit about the Constitution portrays the document as pro-slavery. Another exhibit displays photos of 18 American presidents with details about their connections to slavery. A video played for visitors features scenes from Black Lives Matter protests and labels both Madison and the Constitution as racist. In addition, factual errors exaggerate the extent of slavery in American history. One exhibit identifies New Hampshire’s slave population as 11%, while the true number was 0.11%. Littered with historical errors and biased rhetoric, Montpelier is just one example of the influence of modern political bias in the museum world.
Though I was aware of political bias in the museum world prior to beginning my work in the Reagan Ranch curatorial department, I experienced this bias firsthand at the annual conference hosted by the American Association for State and Local History. With sessions focusing on queer history, indigenous voices, and climate change, I knew what I was walking into. However, I was optimistic that I could avoid egregious left-leaning bias by avoiding sessions like these. I quickly realized this was not possible. While attending sessions and networking events, I received disdainful looks and disrespectful comments when I mentioned my association with President Reagan and Young America’s Foundation. One woman called President Reagan a profanity and refused to continue our conversation any further.
Though discouraged by this hostile environment, I remained determined to learn something new as I attended a keynote session called the “Historical Thinking Under Fire Town Hall.” The session commenced with a standing ovation for the Montpelier curatorial staff. One panelist, Noelle Trent from the National Civil Rights Museum, labeled the Heritage Foundation’s report as “bigoted” and “hateful,” warning attendees that “they’re going to come after you next, it’s just a matter of time.”
The conversation devolved into a brainstorming session about how to protect critical race theory in the classroom despite backlash from parents, legislators, and conservative “bigots.” Though nine states have placed a formal ban on critical race theory in the classroom, Trent identified a loophole in state law. No critical race theory ban prohibits museums from utilizing this teaching method. Therefore, according to Trent and other panelists, museums should take advantage of this loophole by creating partnerships with teachers to continue teaching students critical race theory through field trips and guest speakers.
Discussion of critical race theory continued during the Q&A portion of the session. Deborah from the San Antonio African American Archive and Museum insisted that critical race theory “is not an alternative narrative, it is a comprehensive, collective narrative. It is not a theory, it is history.” Anne, a former high school social studies teacher, complained that “they’re only teaching white history in schools, they’re favoring white people.” Multiple museum professionals and educators stepped forward to express their fear of conservative groups threatening their politically motivated narrative. Rebecca, a former museum educator, expressed this sentiment: “We are worried, we are fearful. We are afraid that our funders will go away, our docent guild will kick up a storm.”
I learned several lessons from my time at the Annual AASLH Conference. The first, that leftism has permeated the museum world. Many museum professionals no longer strive for truth and accuracy but focus on catering to a political narrative. This severe bias not only affects museum design and historical accuracy, but relationships among professionals. Diversity is emphasized, until it comes to diversity of thought.
Second, museum professionals are worried. They understand that their narrative is only successful when unchallenged. Taking the Heritage Foundation’s lead, we must continue to challenge distorted, manipulated, and misleading history when we see it. Above all, we must avoid presentism at all costs, judging history not by the values of modern society but with a contextualized, comprehensive understanding of the past.
As a museum professional in the ideological minority, it is reassuring to know that while scarce, some museums refuse to yield to political pressure. Thanks to Young America’s Foundation and its supporters, President Ronald Reagan’s legacy will never be tarnished by those who value political correctness over truth.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM RESTORING AMERICA
Maddie Dermon is an assistant curator at the Reagan Ranch for Young America’s Foundation.
