Anyone still confused why Republicans defunded PBS needs to look no further than a Thursday Amanpour & Company segment featuring host Christiane Amanpour and women, gender, and sexuality/African and American studies Prof. Imani Perry. Both would accuse President Trump of waging a war on knowledge as he seeks to reform the Smithsonian Institution, while Perry ironically spread historically-dubious narratives and warned of impending fascism.

Amanpour made no effort to even try to understand Trump’s perspective:

Trump, and let me quote him, has said the Smithsonian was, quote, ‘out of control.’ It's the—you know, it's the center of wokeness. He says "everything discussed is ‘how horrible our country is, how bad slavery was and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been.’ Not quite sure what that last bit means, but anyway, what do you think that they want to see at somewhere like the Smithsonian or any of the other institutes, like the National Portrait Gallery, The Kennedy Center that so much control has now been taken by the administration?

Perry began, “I mean, I do think that it is, on the one hand, a kind of effort to displace knowledge and study with mythology. You cannot – you simply cannot tell the story of the United States without the story of American slavery, for example. You can't tell the story of how the nation became a global power without it.”

You absolutely can tell the history of how America became a global power without slavery. Speaking of knowledge, every serious Civil War historian will tell you the South lost, in part, because slavery rendered it economically backward and Northern industry was key to the Union victory. Meanwhile, the U.S. didn’t really become a global power until three decades after slavery was abolished.

Nevertheless, Perry continued, “But there's a way in which there's a commitment on the part of this administration to tell a kind of story that, on the one hand, supports a vision of the nation as fundamentally white, as sort of this romanticized story that is one that excludes, that limits, that excludes people of color, that excludes LGBTQIA communities, that excludes the idea that women ought to be self-actualizing and making decisions for their own lives.

Perry also insisted that “the vision is one that, on the one hand, is anti-intellectual, which I think is potentially disastrous. And on the other is a kind of manipulation of very old culture wars to distract Americans from the other kinds of threats that this administration is posing.”

Playing along, Amanpour followed up, “So, let's just play this intellectual, you know, game out, which is not a game. I mean, it is a reality. What is the chilling effect? What happens when a government systematically tries to, you know, distance itself from knowledge, from, you know, actual history, from what's going on? What would happen to a nation if that is allowed to proceed?”

Because no left-wing freakout about Trump is complete without warnings of fascism and the collapse of democracy, Perry answered, “I mean, we've seen the examples historically. This is the attack on institutions of knowledge, it's one of the sort of consistent pre-court cursors to fascism and authoritarianism. It certainly is a deep threat to democracy if people are afraid to tell their stories, to participate fully in the nation. I will say though, notwithstanding all of that, that there are people who are continuing to resist this turn.”

Amanpour likes to say she is truthful, not neutral, but this segment was neither truthful nor neutral and is a good example of not only why PBS was defunded but also why Trump thought the Smithsonian reforms were needed in the first place.

Here is a transcript for the September 4 show:

PBS Amanpour and Company

9/4/2025

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: Trump, and let me quote him, has said the Smithsonian was, quote, "out of control." It's the — you know, it's the center of wokeness. He says “everything discussed is how horrible our country is, how bad slavery was and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been.”

Not quite sure what that last bit means, but anyway, what do you think that they want to see at somewhere like the Smithsonian or any of the other institutes, like the National Portrait Gallery, The Kennedy Center that so much control has now been taken by the administration?

IMANI PERRY: Right. I mean, I do think that it is, on the one hand, a kind of effort to displace knowledge and study with mythology. You cannot – you simply cannot tell the story of the United States without the story of American slavery, for example. You can't tell the story of how the nation became a global power without it. But there's a way in which there's a commitment on the part of this administration to tell a kind of story that on the one hand, supports a vision of the nation as fundamentally white, as sort of this romanticized story that is one that excludes, that limits, that excludes people of color, that excludes LGBTQIA communities, that excludes the idea that women ought to be self-actualizing and making decisions for their own lives.

And so, the vision is one that, on the one hand, is anti-intellectual, which I think is potentially disastrous. And on the other is a kind of manipulation of very old culture wars to distract Americans from the other kinds of threats that this administration is posing. So, to say, “oh, look, it's all those other — those troubling others that are causing your problems” as opposed to all of the very real dangers now to our health, to our wellbeing, to our national security and our foreign policy, all of those things.

AMANPOUR: So, let's just play this intellectual, you know, game out, which is not a game. I mean, it is a reality. What is the chilling effect? What happens when a government systematically tries to, you know, distance itself from knowledge, from, you know, actual history, from what's going on? What would happen to a nation if that is allowed to proceed?

PERRY: I mean, we've seen the examples historically. This is the attack on institutions of knowledge, it's one of the sort of consistent pre-court cursors to fascism and authoritarianism. It certainly is a deep threat to democracy if people are afraid to tell their stories, to participate fully in the nation. I will say though, notwithstanding all of that, that there are people who are continuing to resist this turn. I think of my colleague Sarah Lewis's Vision and Justice Initiative, which is trying to make the argument that you have to actually see the fullest representation of human beings in order to get to justice through the work of artists and scholars. And so, there is an imminent danger. And at the same time, you know, there — not everyone is willing to lie down and take care.