Media blast Trump for ‘scrubbing’ Confederate history based on prediction of what he’ll do

BS BULLETIN:

The Trump administration removed Arlington language criticizing a Confederate memorial’s depiction of slavery.
The statue was removed in 2023 under Biden after a congressionally mandated process.
Arlington promises new “clear and accurate” historical context — but it hasn’t been released, leaving critics to condemn language they haven’t seen.

The headlines are already arriving.

The Trump administration is “scrubbing” criticism of slavery from Arlington National Cemetery. History is being sanitized. Uncomfortable truths about the Confederacy are disappearing.

There is one rather important piece of this story that hasn’t happened yet: Arlington hasn’t released the replacement historical interpretation.

What has happened is clear.

A marker at Arlington criticizing the Confederate Memorial’s portrayal of slavery has been replaced. Similar language was removed from the cemetery’s website. The old material described sculptor Moses Ezekiel’s monument as offering a “nostalgic, mythologized vision of the Confederacy” and “highly sanitized depictions of slavery.”

The Washington Post reported the removal and quoted historians sharply criticizing the decision. Retired Brig. Gen. Ty Seidule, who served as vice chairman of the Naming Commission, called the monument “pro-slavery” and “anti-United States.”

Those criticisms are fair game.

But predicting what the Trump administration’s replacement historical interpretation will say is something else.

Arlington’s current official statement says the Army “will develop interpretive content to ensure visitors receive clear and accurate contextual information” when the refurbished sculpture is displayed in 2027.

The Army has not publicly unveiled that new interpretive content.

So it is presently possible to report that the old language was removed.

It is not yet possible to compare that language with its eventual replacement and determine that the new presentation whitewashes slavery — because the replacement isn’t public.

There is another piece of history worth remembering: how the monument disappeared in the first place.

Congress created the Naming Commission through the FY2021 National Defense Authorization Act. President Trump vetoed that legislation, and Congress overrode him.

The commission later recommended removing the bronze elements of this particular memorial. During the Biden administration, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin concurred with the Naming Commission’s recommendations, and the Army subsequently implemented the decision.

Arlington’s own description is unusually straightforward: the removal was “required by Congress and implemented by the Secretary of Defense.”

The Army physically removed the bronze elements in December 2023, during President Biden’s administration.

Now the policy has changed again.

The sculpture is scheduled to return to Section 16 near Ezekiel’s grave in 2027 after conservation and refurbishment. And, importantly, Arlington isn’t saying the monument will simply be dropped back onto the grounds without explanation.

It is promising new historical interpretation.

Arlington’s current website already discusses slavery, Reconstruction, racial segregation and the treatment of Black soldiers at considerable length. It says the memorial offers visitors an opportunity to consider “the history and meanings of the Civil War, slavery, and the relationship between military service, citizenship and race in America.”

None of that guarantees what the final marker will say. But that’s precisely the point.

If Arlington eventually produces language that minimizes slavery or presents demonstrably inaccurate history, reporters will have the words sitting in front of them and can scrutinize every sentence.

Until then, there is a difference between reporting that the Trump administration removed one interpretation and declaring that it has replaced history with a sanitized version.

We haven’t seen the replacement yet.

MY QUICK TAKE

Apparently we’ve reached the point where the press can fact-check a historical marker before the historical marker exists. The old language is gone. That’s news. Report it. But Arlington says new historical context is coming, says it will be “clear and accurate,” and hasn’t released it yet.

Maybe it’ll be excellent. Maybe it’ll be terrible. Maybe historians will tear it apart sentence by sentence.

Here’s a radical proposal: How about we wait for the sentences?