So here we are: in the land that likes to pretend it reveres its “heritage,” we discover that wrecking part of one of its most emblematic public buildings to erect a gargantuan party hall is somehow progress. The same outlet owned by Jeff Bezos tips its hat and says, yes indeed — the White House cannot be a museum of the past. Because apparently, the past is worth nothing if you can replace it with something shinier and larger.
Let’s pause. The East Wing, which once held the offices of the first lady, the White House theater, and countless cultural memories, is being bulldozed to make way for a privately funded, ninety-thousand-square-foot ballroom addition. Jeff Bezos’s paper declares that America is young, that we tear things down, that we’re not about preserving stuff, and that the White House shouldn’t be stuck in amber. Fine, I get the “we evolve” argument. But there’s something cloying about embracing that while simultaneously championing an enormous vanity project under the guise of progress.
If we truly believed historic buildings were disposable, we’d have already paved over small towns and burned down every remnant of the past — and yes, we’ve done plenty of that. But if the justification is “we’re young and need new,” then let’s admit we don’t care about history at all. The balm of innovation is a thin cover for avalanches of profit motives, influence, and spectacle. Jeff Bezos owns the paper; he profits from advertising, brand equity, and the narrative of modernity. He also benefits from a country that sees its landmarks not as sacred, but as raw material.
And yes, the editorial insists that the White House must not be a museum. But what else is it becoming — a gala factory? A corporate events suite? A gold-plated showroom for power? The ballroom isn’t being built for everyday Americans; it’s being built for “distinguished guests” and “great companies” whose names will shimmer beneath the chandeliers.
If the argument is that the country needs large event space, then perhaps it should build that somewhere else. The presidency already has access to every grand venue in Washington. When you turn the White House itself into a stage for excess, the symbol of democracy becomes a brand logo for the powerful.
Yes, America tears down its history. We do it gleefully. But when the most iconic residence of its executive is treated like an old strip mall, we’ve crossed a line — from preservation to consumption, from memory to marketing. The Post dresses this up as progress, but the real question is: progress for whom? For the nation, or for those who can afford to rent the dance floor?
Jeff Bezos’s newspaper may trumpet, “Don’t hold us back by being a museum,” but what it really means is, “Don’t hold us back from turning even history itself into content.” A museum invites reflection; a ballroom invites applause. And in the end, if the White House becomes less a home than a showroom, perhaps the new ballroom will serve its purpose perfectly — not as a place to honor the past, but as a place to celebrate how easily we forget it.
,