By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The recent demolition of the White House’s East Wing by Donald Trump disregards a century-long tradition of consulting architectural experts, a practice established after a similar expansion attempt in 1900. In 1900, architects, led by Glenn Brown, successfully advocated for a design that respected the original White House, leading to the creation of the West and East Wings through a collaborative process. This established a norm of deference to historical context and expert opinions, which was mostly followed by subsequent presidents. However, Trump’s actions, including the proposed ballroom, have ignored these established norms, pushing grandiose projects and reshaping the capital without expert input, which could lead to lasting changes.
Read the original article here
The whole idea of White House architecture being an honor system is a stark realization, a bit like discovering the wizard behind the curtain. It seems the unspoken rules, the norms, the traditions – they were the bedrock, the unwritten code that governed the space and, by extension, the presidency. The expectation was, essentially, that those in power would uphold these principles. And then along came Donald Trump. He saw the honor system, and he saw a playground, a loophole, a chance to reshape the narrative, the physical space, and ultimately, the very fabric of how things are done.
This isn’t just about decor, or the aesthetics of a building. It’s about a fundamental shift in how power is perceived and wielded. The White House, a symbol of American democracy, was supposed to reflect restraint, transparency, and a commitment to the greater good. Trump’s approach, described as akin to a Nietzschean “Übermensch,” seemed to bypass these considerations altogether. Breaking the rules, flaunting convention, and pursuing a personal vision – these became the new normal. The idea of the White House as a monument to democratic values, a place of historical significance to be carefully preserved, apparently was lost on the man.
The implications are far-reaching. The legislative branch, so often reliant on norms rather than codified laws, became less relevant, while the executive branch expanded its reach. The checks and balances that were supposed to prevent such abuses seemingly crumbled in the face of a president willing to ignore them. The concept of accountability, of consequences for breaking the rules, became blurred. Trump’s behavior highlighted a troubling reality: that an honor system only works when those involved are, well, honorable. Otherwise, the whole thing falls apart.
The rapid pace of changes within the White House during his administration seems astonishing. It makes one question the review process for additions or modifications, suggesting a system that was more accommodating than it was restrictive. The fact that the entire building, a symbol of American democracy, could be potentially altered to fit a single person’s desires highlights a disturbing lack of safeguards. And the financial implications, the cost to taxpayers, becomes another layer of concern.
The stark contrast between Trump’s vision and the historical context of the White House is jarring. The American capital was designed to avoid European excesses, projecting simplicity and egalitarianism, values that sharply contrast with the kind of personal power Trump projects. The White House wasn’t meant to be a dictator’s palace; it was built to reflect a government “of the people, by the people, for the people”. Trump’s pursuit of a Versailles-esque aesthetic, the creation of gold-laden ballrooms, all underscore a departure from the established norms. This is more than aesthetics; it is a blatant departure from the foundational values of this nation.
The whole thing seems to highlight that the very systems that we are supposed to rely on; the checks and balances and the laws of the land – are, in effect, pointless unless they are consistently enforced. They become meaningless if there are no real consequences for breaking them. It’s the equivalent of a guardrail on a road that has no police to enforce the speed limit, creating chaos. This isn’t just about the White House; it is about the broader state of our democracy. It is a harsh reminder that the “honor system” is a fragile foundation, easily shattered by those who lack, well, honor.
This whole episode seems to point to the need for stricter rules and regulations, the codification of procedures and, perhaps most importantly, a commitment to actually enforcing them. It underscores the urgency of creating a system that cannot be manipulated or exploited by those in power. Trump, in his own way, exposed the flaws in the system, proving that the ideals of American democracy could be vulnerable to those who treat them like suggestions. And that’s something the next administration is going to have to address, and quick.