As the National Review’s Richard W. Painter puts it, “The National Museum of the American West is the most disgusting museum in the country.
It is as big a cesspool of filth as it is of the country.”
He points out that its exhibits of “slavery, slavery, and the barbarity of white supremacy” are “the epitome of what we have to endure today in America.”
Painter also makes the point that the museum’s “historical and artistic output has been systematically dismantled and marginalized for the past 50 years.”
He is right.
In this context, “the museum is no longer merely an institution to which the American public is invited to donate their time and resources.
It has become a political battleground.”
Painter is right about the “political battleground” in this case: it is a “political battlefield” of the very type that led to the creation of the “War on Terror” in the first place.
For the past two decades, the Museum of American History has been fighting to maintain its own identity.
The museum’s history is not simply a collection of objects, but rather, it is the “cultural fabric” of its namesake city.
The Museum of Southern History is the first museum in this country to hold a formal dedication ceremony.
The dedication ceremony was the first step toward “creating a more robust and inclusive museum culture.”
The dedication ceremonies, and a number of other ceremonies around the country, are designed to foster an “empowerment and respect” culture at the museum.
As a result, the museum is more than a museum.
The Smithsonian Institute, the Smithsonian’s flagship institution, has made clear that it wants the museum to be “a cultural center that provides space for students and scholars to connect with their cultural heritage and explore how it has shaped American life and culture.”
That is what the museum does, and that is what it intends to do for the next fifty years.
The National Museum was founded in 1917 by Frederick Law Olmsted.
Its mission was to “provide a living museum that reflects the rich history of the people of America.”
Its history is a rich history, but it is also a museum, which is to say it is not the museum that is the center of the collection.
As Painter puts the matter, “It is not a museum that tells the history of a particular place.
It provides the history, it offers the history and it is then able to offer a sense of community and pride.”
The museum is a political battlefield of the same kind that led Americans to the ” War on Terror .”
For decades, that battle has pitted the museum against the institution that created it.
And for good reason: as the National Museum’s mission has become increasingly defined by its role in the ongoing war against “racism” and “white supremacy,” the museum has been transformed from a museum of historical curiosity into a museum for political warfare.
The purpose of the museum was to help “create a more substantive and inclusive culture.”
Now, however, it serves a purpose that no longer fits the museum mission.
The war against the museum began long before the war against racism and white supremacy.
That war was waged by the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), a $2.7 billion, 100-year-old institution that is supposed to “promote the study and appreciation of the humanities.”
In recent years, NEH has been engaged in a campaign to defund and defund the Museum, claiming that it “fails to meet basic standards of integrity and excellence.”
This is an absurd claim.
First, the NEH is not only the world’s largest non-profit institution for humanities research and teaching.
Its annual budget is about $2 billion, and its activities are widely recognized for the value of the humanities.
In fact, the United States has one of the highest humanities graduation rates in the world.
Second, NEB has received a number the highest amount of federal funding for the humanities since the 1970s.
Third, NEBs annual budget for the museum, including funds for faculty and student fellowships, was approximately $150 million last year, with $60 million of that coming from the federal government.
In other words, NEHB’s spending is far larger than NEB’s revenue.
But NEHB has a different reason for its funding.
The NEH, along with its “research and teaching arm” NEI, is tasked with “promoting a cultural identity for the nation,” according to the NEI’s website.
This cultural identity is the NEAH’s stated goal.
This goal has been met in a variety of ways: NEI has received grants to “enhance the humanities in public life” through grants to private and nonprofit institutions.
NEI also supports “a number of public institutions and non-profits to strengthen their cultural and public identity.”
The NEI is “the leading international academic association for the study of the cultural and social development of the United State.” NEI