“Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History”: Trump, McCarthyism, and what this means for the future of American freedom of speech 

Article by Ana Zelaya Ramentol

Image courtesy of wikimedia commons by author Zack Frank

On March 27th, 2025, President Donald J. Trump released an executive order titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History.” The main points stand as follows: since January 1, 2022, American history has been rewritten to promote anti-American agendas and ideologies. According to the executive order, the United States’ legacy and main principles of liberty and freedom were under attack, being erroneously characterized as sexist, racist, and white nationalist. Former President Joseph Biden was at fault, the executive order states, as he allowed this “corrosive ideology” to advance. 

One of the institutions at fault is the Smithsonian Institution, a federally funded network of 21 museums across Washington D.C., Puerto Rico, and New York. Three museums are cited: the National Museum of African American History and Culture, the Smithsonian American Art Museum, and the still-in-progress Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum. All three museums are found to criticize American values and promote division in the country. Their crimes? Interrogating “white culture,” claiming race is a societal construct, and celebrating “the exploits of male athletes participating in women’s sports,” respectively. These museums dared to reconsider sexist, white supremacist, or heteronormative ideals, and for that they are being punished by the Trump administration. 

As a result, the Trump administration will investigate the Smithsonian Institution, restoring any potentially offensive structures and monuments. The future of the Institution looks uncertain. Two-thirds of the Smithsonian’s $1 billion budget comes from the government, and as a federal institution, it straddles a fine line between serving both the public and the government, which enables the institution to function. 

The Motion Picture Production Code & McCarthyism: Censorship in the past 

If you’re a film history nerd, like me, you’ve probably heard of the Motion Picture Production Code. Also known as the Hays Codewhich was formed in 1930 by Will Hays, president of the Production Code Administration, at a time when audiences were growing more concerned with the content of contemporary film releases. Films received major public outrage for their portrayals of brutal violence, prostitution, substance use, etc. As the government grew more aware of these issues, they began to threaten censorship upon the film industry, even preventing the 1930 Czech film, “Ecstasy” starring pre-name change Hedy Lamarr, from going through Customs. 

In an amendment to their strategies, the Code was reinforced in 1934, under new PCA President Joseph Breen. The Production Code Administration decreed that any film to be released in Hollywood had to be approved by them. They could demand substantial edits to films or even withdraw their approval entirely, preventing it from being released.

In a gross simplification of the whole issue, the Motion Picture Production Code was created to self-censor the film industry as a reaction to the growing threat of government censorship. The prohibited content included: 

– Sexual immorality- no explicit references to sexual behaviour, adultery, and “sexual deviants” (such as homosexuals). 

– Crime and crime behaviour- criminals have to be punished by the end of the film, and criminals cannot be glorified. 

– Drugs and alcohol- discouraged depictions of drug use or excessive drinking. 

-Religious sensitivity- no content that could be seen as blasphemous or disrespectful. 

-Violence and brutality- violence, especially towards women and children. Gory scenes were prohibited. 

– Nudity- absolutely no nudity or suggestive clothing. 

– Miscegenation- no interracial couples. 

Moving along to the mid-20th century, the House Un-American Committee also participated in censoring and controlling Hollywood and the lives of American citizens. Founded in 1938, the House Un-American Committee (HUAC) aimed to root out Communists in the United States government, as well as any other positions of power and leadership. The “Un-American” values it opposed were mainly tied to Communism at the start of the Cold War, but soon encompassed anything left-of-center on the political scale, and encroached on civilians’ freedom of speech and personal freedoms. Spearheaded by Senator Joseph McCarthy, “McCarthyism” became the practice of accusing people of having left-leaning ties, even with little to no evidence. These victims would be brought to trial, where if they pleaded the 5th Amendment (i.e., refused to answer), they would be charged with contempt and assumed to be guilty. During these trials, the HUAC would demand other names, asking the defendants to incriminate others, rapidly devolving the practice into a witch hunt. You can see these investigations in the Showtime miniseries “Fellow Travelers”(2023) starring Jonathan Bailey and Matt Bomer; the series is named after the euphemism for Communist sympathisers. 

In the context of Hollywood, screenwriters and directors were called to testify in front of the HUAC. When 10 of them decided not to answer their question in 1947, a blacklist was created, historically called the “Hollywood Ten,” barring them from work ever again. That is just one example. Further blacklists were created to preserve the film industry’s “patriotic credentials.” Actors, directors, screenwriters, musicians… No one was safe from these investigations. The integrity and creative freedom of the industry was impeded as the fear from being associated with blacklisted individuals and their “Un-American” values was too great. 

What happens now? 

Is this sounding a little familiar to you at all? In the Executive Order, President Trump outright accuses the Smithsonian of holding exhibitions that “degrade American values” (Sec 2bi).

Whomever decides what “American values” are decides who gets to speak at all. In a worrying parallel to McCarthyism and the blacklists that ensued, culture in the United States might go back to self-censoring and accusing fellow citizens in an attempt to save themselves from possible censorship from the government. In a study by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), it was found that college faculty are more likely to self-censor for fear of repercussions now than in the height of the McCarthy era (35% in 2024 vs 9% in 1954). If the government were to pull all $1 billion in funding from the Smithsonian because of the alleged criticisms of American values, it might mean that other areas of the creative industry will be affected. The same way museums can be targeted for their exhibitions, films and studios could be targeted for potentially left-of-center values like the Hollywood blacklist. Even worse, we could go back to the days of self-censorship, where studio executives fear the content put out by filmmakers and create their own guidelines for what is permitted and what is not. 

I do want to leave this article on a semi-hopeful note, however. The adage remains true: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Learning about the ways that arts and culture have come under attack during the past 100 years is paramount to avoiding further censorship and federal control over creativity. It is easy to lose sight of where the future is going, but as we are in the beginning stages of a new presidency, we must stay alert and know what we can do for our respective industries. We would not want it to be too late.