Connect with us

News

An honest conversation with the Black women fighting for Trump’s reelection

Published

on

An honest conversation with the Black women fighting for Trump's reelection
YouTube video

Recent polling data suggests a near twenty percent increase the number of Black men voting for Trump in 2024 while Black women remain the bedrock of the Democratic party and their most loyal and consistent contingent of voters. However, there are some women who are leaving to not just join the Republican Party, but take on active leadership roles. Taya Graham speaks with the National Engagement Director of Moms For Liberty Tia Bess, and the Black Media Director for Trump’s reelection campaign Janiyah Thomas to try and understand why they choose to support the Trump-Vance ticket and how they defend their policies and outrageous comments, as well as the personal cost of being vilified for their controversial conservative views.

Studio Production: Cameron Granadino
Post-Production: Adam Coley


Transcript

Taya Graham:  Today we are diving into a topic that is almost taboo in this country: Black conservative women who are joining, and in some sense, shaping the current Republican Party. We often hear about Black men turning conservative, and I actually produced a piece on that phenomenon when I covered the Republican National Convention last month.

But today I’m going to delve into the stories of women, and specifically, Black women who are crossing over and declaring their allegiance to the Grand Old Party despite social pressure and the general expectation that Black women vote blue.

Well, my next guests decidedly don’t. Let’s remember, Black women are the most consistent Democratic voters in the country. The Party relies on Black women’s votes to carry them over the finish line. So this is no idle decision to cross the line and go to the other side. So what happens when these Black women say no to the Democrats? Why are they joining the GOP, and what are they gaining? And what might they be losing?

Well, today I’m joined by two prominent figures who are challenging established norms. Janiyah Thomas, the Black media engagement director for Donald Trump’s 2024 reelection campaign, and Tia Bess, the national director for Moms of Liberty, a Black woman with a wife and family of her own. Both of these women are at the forefront of the conservative movement in hugely important roles, advocating for values that many would argue stand in stark contrast to the communities they represent. We’ll explore their motivations or challenges and how they reconcile their identities with their political beliefs. And I’m so excited to speak with these women and grateful for their time.

Advertisement

Thank you both so much for joining me. So first, let me ask you a question to help everyone get to know you a bit. Tia, were you ever a Democrat? And can you share part of your journey from voting blue to supporting President Donald Trump and aligning yourself with the Moms for Liberty? Can you maybe share with me a specific experience that led you down this path?

Tia Bess:  Sure. Well, thank you so much for having me on. It’s always a pleasure. And let’s just say I was a Democrat. I looked at my voter registration card yesterday and it took me back because it was a day before my birthday when I was in high school. And I remember asking, what do I put? What party do I put? And they simply told me this basic line, if you’re Black, you register Democrat. If not, you register Republican. Because the Republicans only want to take away the benefits from the poor, and they’re only rich and white. That’s it.

And that stuck with me from 18 to my 30s because I thought that, okay, I’m a poor student. I was a homeless high school student, and of course, that was how my family was eating. So I wouldn’t want my benefits to be taken away. So for years, I party voted. I voted for Obama because he was Black. I voted for Hillary because she was a woman. I voted [inaudible] because he was a Black male. If it had a D next to it, you automatically got my vote.

And I didn’t pay attention to the policies. I was extremely liberal, democrat, progressive, but I had to remember about my old school values, the old school values that our grandparents had that really started aligning with other parties. And it no longer represented just an old school of thought, but it was moving forward to what I felt was best for my family.

Advertisement

Taya Graham:  Well, it’s interesting that you said that you voted for President Obama because he’s Black, because obviously we have Vice President Harris in the race who’s Black and a woman. People are very excited about this. They feel that this is historic. So it’s interesting. So let’s say 10 years ago, you would’ve voted for Vice President Harris?

Tia Bess:  I mean, of course, because I’ll put it like this. Well, we’ll say Black. But everyone has their own definition of what is Black. You’re biracial. My son is biracial. My son is actually really African American. He’s half African and he’s actually African American and Caribbean. It’s just we understand how America is, how they have that one drop rule. Doesn’t matter if your dad is white or your mom is white or whoever’s Black, they have a one drop rule.

Taya Graham:  Well, it’s actually really interesting that you bring up her Blackness because that was a question I had that I felt that Trump’s rhetoric, J.D. Vance’s rhetoric, questioning whether or not she was a Black woman. That’s a little bit… Don’t you think that’s really divisive? I think that really does take us back to the idea of the one drop rule.

Tia Bess:  Well, here’s the thing. Growing up myself dealing with colorism, I’m a Black woman, and I’ve been Black my entire life, but I’m not bright skinned. I don’t pass the brown paper bag test, I’ll be honest. We’ve had family members who felt that I was too dark to be in the family. It’s terrible that it is that way.

Advertisement

But if you are being voted, if you’re being elected on the basis of being Black, start off that way. Yes, you’re Asian or Indian American, but be proud to be Black.

Taya Graham:  But wait a second, she went to a historic Black university. She joined a Black sorority. That seems like someone who’s proud to be a Black woman to me.

Tia Bess:  Well, I would say, I would be proud to be biracial. I would represent both parts of my family. You really have to say, no, I represent Jamaican and Indian ancestry. Bring it together. If you have parents from both races, bring it together because both of those races made who you are today. Be proud of both sides.

Taya Graham:  That’s really interesting that you felt that she wasn’t representing both sides of her family because she has spoken about both of them. I would say this: isn’t even debating whether she is Black enough or if she’s Black and Asian, mean, isn’t that actually really divisive? Is that what we should be talking about at all, honestly?

Advertisement

Tia Bess:  Honestly, at the end of the day, it’s petty. I want to care about your policies. I want to care about how are you going to make our country greater, how are you going to take care of our kids at school. You could be purple [laughs]. I just want to make sure that you have the best interest of our country in mind.

Taya Graham:  Janiyah, I have to ask, how did you become the Black media engagement director for the entire Trump reelection campaign? What factors influenced your decision to take the role? And I have to say, especially in the light of what people view as President Trump’s controversial stances on issues affecting the Black community?

Janiyah Thomas:  I mean, I think overall, I’ve been doing this for a while. I originally was the Black media coordinator at the RNC. That was my first job. So I’ve been working with Black press, and I love doing it because sometimes I feel like getting good stories, working with Black-owned media, I feel more rewarded because it’s not as easy to do that all the time, versus working with New York Times, like they’ll do anything and write about anything [laughs].

So it feels more rewarding to work with Black-owned media. And also, as you know, a lot of as Black people rely on Black media to give them factual information, especially when we’re in an election year.

Advertisement

So that has everything to do with it. Part of the reason I took it is because it’s something I thought was really cool, and I feel really passionate about working with Black media.

And I love Donald Trump also, but I think it’s important to have somebody that’s able to speak to those issues, speak to that community, and also someone that’s able to develop relationships with that community as well.

Taya Graham:  Well, I can see that you play a really important role in helping the Black community understand the Republican Party. But I would have to say, it has been strongly criticized for its stance on racial issues.

For example, I have to ask you about affirmative action. The Supreme Court, back in 2023, rejected race-based affirmative action in college admissions. We just got information from MIT, there’s a drop in Black and Latino students, an increase in Asian students.

Advertisement

This is just the facts. This is just the new information that’s coming out since the removal of affirmative action. And this was a direct result of the conservative justices that President Trump appointed.

So what would you say to people who are saying that this means the Trump administration means less opportunity for Black Americans and not more?

Janiyah Thomas:  I wouldn’t say that necessarily the takeaway from that shouldn’t be that it’s less opportunity for Black and Brown communities. I think that the overall point of the affirmative action decision is based on the simple fact of merit. I will speak personally to myself and say that I don’t want to be rewarded for something just because I’m Black or I’m a woman. I want to be there and be in that position because I’m the best person to be there.

So the entire argument around affirmative action on the Republican side is we care more about your work ethic, your merit, and you should be rewarded based off of that.

Advertisement

Taya Graham:  Well, you know what? I do agree with you about merit, but I’ll even use myself as an example. I went to a public school and I actually got great SATs, great grades, but I didn’t have some of the extracurriculars that let’s say I might’ve had if I had gone to a more prestigious high school. And one could argue that affirmative action may have given me an opportunity to prove myself. I mean certainly I would have, and I actually witnessed this, would’ve been put on academic probation, kicked out, lost scholarships if I didn’t perform. 

But what would you say to people that are like, we’re just trying to get the foot in the door. We’re just asking for equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. Just opportunity.”?

Janiyah Thomas:  I mean, I think overall that argument, what you just said, especially about your high school experience and things like that, a lot of that has to do with state level stuff when it comes to the education system. And I think that we need to focus more on those types of issues at the state and local level, especially when we’re talking about schools and inner city communities. 

And I think that something else we need to start doing better is implementing more mentorship programs so that these people in these underprivileged communities have more options or know that there’s another way out or there’s other things that you could be doing. There’s more to life than just what you’re seeing in the neighborhood.

Advertisement

Taya Graham:  Let me talk to you a little bit about your org. You’re the national engagement director. You have a prominent role. So can you talk to me a little bit about what kind of influence you have on the organization stance on diversity and inclusion? And I don’t mean DEI, I mean making sure that Moms of Liberty represents a wide demographic of people and represents people from a wide demographic of communities, like for example the LGBTQ community. So maybe you can tell us a little bit about what your role is and maybe give an example of how your input has influenced or changed policy.

Tia Bess:  Well, for me, I’ve lived in multiple states, military family. This is going to sound really interesting, but I’m just going to say it, we have to get back to basics. A lot of these issues are non-partisan issues. There are issues that we can both agree on. Think about it, like school safety.

For my role as the national director of engagement, it really means a lot to me. I’ve lived in neighborhoods of Philadelphia with drive-by shootings, with gang violence. I’ve lived at the beaches, I’ve lived in the hood, I’ve lived in the trailer park. I’ve lived in so many places where I realized that people are people.

So when I bring this perspective into our organization, it helps create a better understanding with my kids being biracial and international. They bring in the aspect of learning how to speak with people. Here in Washington, D.C., actually, tomorrow I will be attending an Islamic center because you know what? Even parents who are Muslim care about their kids too. They care about the way that their kids are being raised up.

Advertisement

Taya Graham:  Well, it’s interesting that you mentioned that you’re going to this Islamic conference there because this is an organization that is perceived — And please correct me if I’m wrong — Perceived as conservative and as Christian. I think there are people in the organization, for example, who would believe that there’s a biblical definition of marriage between being a man and a woman, that a family should have a female and a male at the head of the table taking care of a family, that that’s what a family should look like.

In all honesty, that’s not what your family looks like. Isn’t that a conflict for you in the organization, that some people have, let’s say, very biblically based views of marriage?

Tia Bess:  Well, I’ll back it up just a little bit. Moms for Liberty is nonpartisan and it represents every background and every religion. We have people who are Jewish. We have people who are Muslim. We have people who are Hebrew Israelites. We have people from so many different backgrounds, but we care about our kids. Parenthood is going to unite this country.

As far as what each individual person believes, that’s their household. But as far as myself, yes, I have a partner. I’ve been in a relationship with a woman for eight years. But for me, with being in the LGB community, I want to make sure that my kids fully understand that you’re still a child. Let kids be kids. Do not shove it down a child’s throat because they still need more data. They don’t even have a baseline for a relationship.

Advertisement

Being a teenager is a confusing age in your life. It’s a confusing stage. I have background in behavioral therapy, case management, and human services. And for me, I love helping people. So helping a child understand that you are beautiful inside and out, give yourself time to grow.

Taya Graham:  I think that’s something you said that’s very beautiful. And I think people, whether they’re Independent or Democrat or Republican, would agree that they want to protect their children and nurture their children and make sure they feel included.

But I noticed you said you’re a member of the LGB community and you left off the T. And that is something that I believe Moms of Liberty has been called out for again and again, that people believe that Moms of Liberty is engaging in harmful and regressive strategies when it comes to transgender children and transgender people, and I’m wondering if you can address that.

Tia Bess:  Well, no, actually, I have multiple friends who are in the transgender community. I have friends who are drag queens [laughs]. We talk about it all the time. I have one friend, he’s like, look, I just want to be my own letter. Because being an individual by yourself, I don’t really know fully the best way to explain it. But if you… I forgot the best way to explain it. I believe that each child is perfect. That’s my personal opinion.

Advertisement

And what about the tomboys? We have tomboys. We have some young men who like to play with their sister’s dolls. In my opinion, there is no right or wrong way to be a boy or girl. You have to grow.

Taya Graham:  Well, I would agree with you, to give children the space and the freedom to discover who they are and not put them in a box of our ideas of what femininity is or what masculinity is, because we both know that changes. I mean, I remember 100 years ago, pink was a boy’s color. So things change, our ideas about this change.

But I have to say, people have really called out Moms of Liberty specifically, that people say Moms of Liberty is actually attacking trans children and trans kids’ experiences in school being that trans kids won’t be included, that they attack unisex bathrooms or bathrooms that are available for transgender children. How do you respond to people who have those concerns?

Tia Bess:  Well, we have had… I actually have a friend, she’s a new member of Moms for Liberty, and she’s transgender with her partner. No child should be attacked in the restroom. I understand both sides. I understand the concerns of the mothers who have young ladies who have been assaulted in restrooms by young men who are assuming that identity that week. We have multiple parents who have had issues happening in schools with their young ladies. And I know a lot of fathers are concerned about that.

Advertisement

We’ve made proposals that we need to have the funding and build additional restrooms. Everyone deserves the right to go to the restroom. That’s a bodily function [laughs]. Everyone should be comfortable in that restroom. Build single restrooms, or family restrooms, or their individual handicap restrooms. So you can actually have your full privacy. But everyone deserves privacy during that time, especially our young ladies.

Taya Graham:  Well, I think you make a good point. And I think this speaks to what you’ve told me you call “old school” values or conservative values. And I just want to check, you do support former President Trump’s reelection campaign, right?

Tia Bess:  Yes, I do.

Taya Graham:  Okay. And I don’t mean to put too fine a point on this, but President Trump’s history includes multiple marriages, affairs, very insulting language, serious allegations, and this all contrasts sharply with traditional values and conservative values. And I know you’re a Christian woman and that you regularly attend church. How do you reconcile these aspects of him with your support for him as a candidate?

Advertisement

Tia Bess:  Well, here’s the thing. A lot of people on both sides feel like I don’t belong here. Not at this organization in general, but period. They feel like, well, you’re Black. You shouldn’t be around all these people who don’t look like you advocating for parental rights. I have some people who say, wait, I have some people who are Christian who say, you shouldn’t be here because you’re in a two-mom-strong household. We don’t agree about that. And it’s not up to them. It’s my choice. It’s my life.

So I’m a good parent. I care about my kids, I care about the community. I help other people’s kids just for the basic needs. And we all want to feel that we have a place in this world. So yes, I know that Donald Trump has made a lot of comments. I’m going be honest with you, I didn’t even like the man at first. I didn’t like anybody who was Republican. But then I started to realize everybody lies. I didn’t like anybody from any side.

My biggest thing I wish is that some days I wish there wasn’t even a party name because I’ve met some great people that we don’t even start talking about politics because I tell them, I don’t want to know your political views because I think you’re a great person. And if you passed out in front of me, regardless if you’re LGBTQI+, if you’re a man, if you’re a woman, if you’re young, old, it doesn’t matter your race, if you passed out in front of me, and because of my first responder background, I’m going to get down and try to save your life. That’s going to be my first concern. And that’s what I want people to get back to.

I’ve met President Donald Trump and I’ve met Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. And if in any type of way that I feel I’m being discriminated against, I won’t support you.

Advertisement

Taya Graham:  How would you reconcile President Trump’s behavior, which critics say often contradicts conservative values? Not to be crude, but if Vice President Harris had been married three times and had five children with three different men, I think people would not consider her a representative of conservative values. I think people would be very critical of those personal choices.

If you can respond to critics of the former president who say he does not embody conservative values or Christian values, what would you tell them?

Janiyah Thomas:  I think a lot of these critics, a lot of it’s coming from media people, which, from my experience, their perception of reality and what actual voters care about are two different things. So I would say that I’ve never heard of an actual regular voter when we’ve been on the trail mentioning any of these things.

The point is to say to the critics, we saw what four years of President Trump looked like, we saw what four years of Kamala Harris and the Biden administration looks like, and I think that for a lot of us, especially Black and Brown people, we were all doing better under President Trump’s leadership. And I think that it’s more about what he’s done as a candidate and what he’s done as the president of the United States, less and less about his personal life.

Advertisement

Taya Graham:  Well, it’s interesting you said that because, as the Black media engagement director, you’re trying to reach out to the Black community and show people that the Republican Party perhaps isn’t what it’s painted by the media, that it is inclusive.

But I would say this: President Trump selected J.D. Vance as his vice president. I would say if he wanted to show the Republican Party was in a new era and welcoming Black and Brown Americans, Sen. Tim Scott would’ve been an excellent choice. So I’m just curious what your take is on the choice of Vance over Scott, and do you think that affects the party’s image among Black voters?

Janiyah Thomas:  Like I said earlier, we care about merit and who’s the best person for the job, and President Trump made that decision and chose J.D. Vance as our vice president candidate. Obviously, I’m from South Carolina. I think Tim Scott’s amazing. But I mean, it’s not always about what you look like to show people we’re the party of being inclusive. I think we can do that in multiple ways.

President Trump is not the traditional Republican candidate. So I think a lot of the things that he’s done and is wanting to do haven’t always aligned with traditional Republican politics. So I think there’s ways to show that we’re inclusive and want more people to come join the party.

Advertisement

Example, having someone like Amber Rose speaking at our convention. That’s not something George Bush may have done [laughs], but just simple things like that, just showing and showing up. We’ve been going to Democrat-ran cities and meeting with voters there, and that’s not stuff traditional Republicans do either. So I think there’s more ways to show that he wants more people in the party and to be more inclusive versus who the vice presidential candidate is.

And I think overall our message with Black voters resonates the best with President Trump. I think that the reason we’re seeing an uptick of Black voters supporting President Trump is because they like his message. And again, like I said earlier, they’ve seen four years of Trump and they’ve seen four years of this administration, and I think that’s made it very simple for a lot of Black and Brown voters.

Taya Graham:  There are people who feel that… I mean, Black women are considered the bedrock of the Democratic Party. And of course, there are Christian conservative women that still vote Democrat. So how do you respond to critics who say that you and other Black conservatives in leadership roles are there just for optics, or even worse, doing this for cynical reasons? How would you respond to that?

Janiyah Thomas:  I’ll say, at the end of the day, I don’t have to explain myself to anybody but the Lord and my parents [laughs]. So my motive for doing what I’m doing has nothing to do with cynical reasons or to be the token Black person.

Advertisement

Like I said earlier, the role of being able to have someone that can engage with Black press and has developed relations with Black press is very important in this election cycle. So I think that is the reason why I’m here.

I care about making momentum with Black voters, and I care about getting our message to that audience, whether that’s traditional, non-traditional, or Black-owned media. That’s my overall goal.

So I would say the critics and people are going to say what they want to say. They’re going to say stuff regardless if you’re on the right or the left. There’s always going to be somebody criticizing you. But I mean, we always get that typical, you’re an Uncle Tom. You’re a token, whatever.

And at this point, I don’t care anymore. But it is more hurtful coming from other Black people because I think that the larger conversation we need to have as a community is we need to talk more about why we can’t have conversations, why we can’t agree to disagree, why it has to be a whole family fallout because one of us wants to think differently than the rest of the family.

Advertisement

I think the bigger conversation is what can we do better as a people to be able to have those tough conversations? Because if we want equality, then I think that means equality on the right and on the left.

Taya Graham:  That’s a really interesting point that you want there to be space for diversity of opinion. And you pointed out, quite rightly, that the media sometimes is at fault in helping to, let’s say, inflame rhetoric or highlight questionable rhetoric. In particular, I would say there has been quite a bit of discussion around President Trump and Sen. Vance questioning Vice President Kamala Harris’s Blackness. How would you even define personally what it is to be Black enough in America? Isn’t that really divisive rhetoric?

Janiyah Thomas:  The funny thing is I hear more white people asking this question than Black people, especially when it comes to media. One, I’ll say that what he has said, especially during the NABJ conventions in that situation in particular, he didn’t say anything that Black Twitter hasn’t been saying for years, first of all. So I mean, if your algorithm aligns that way, then you’ve seen these tweets and you’ve seen these things.

And the point of it is basically to say that she is a flip-flopper, and she goes back and forth on her identity and policy. So the point is to say, if you can’t stand firm in your identity, how can we trust what you say you’re going to do as the President of the United States?

Advertisement

Taya Graham:  But the thing is though, she went to a historic Black university, she joined a Black sorority, it’s not like she has…

Janiyah Thomas:  But since when are those qualifications for Blackness? I know white people that have done the same thing [both laugh]. I think we need to stop trying to categorize ourselves and put ourselves in this box to say, okay, well, you did XYZ, so that makes you Black enough. I don’t think that those two things are the qualifications, but I don’t think there is a qualification. I don’t think it matters what she is or what she isn’t. I think it’s more so about what she has done and what she can do.

Taya Graham:  What do you think it says to Black voters that he would overlook someone like Sen. Scott for a junior senator like Vance?

Tia Bess:  Well, I’ll say this. Initially, I’m not a political person. Like I tell anybody, before COVID, I would rather have a root canal. [inaudible]. I turned off that TV so fast because I couldn’t stand anybody because all I saw were politicians just pandering to our communities.

Advertisement

This has been going on for 30, 40 years from my sight, and I’m just tired of seeing the degradation of society. I’m tired of seeing run down Black communities and Black schools. There’s neighborhoods where kids can’t go for school choice. There’s neighborhoods where they can’t get a transfer. So what about these babies? So I want to make sure that I’m following policy. I want to know what your policy is. I will no longer vote party or just because I like your name, but I want to vote for your policy.

As far as President Donald Trump choosing J.D. Vance, I’m going to be honest, at first, I didn’t know that much about the man, but I like his background and the struggle and the grit that he’s been through. Sometimes in order to meet people where they’re at, you got to bring in someone who’s been where they’re at, who’s been down in the ditches. Maybe God has other plans for Tim Scott. We don’t know what the bigger plan is, but either way, regardless of who wins, I’m still going to respect that decision. I’m still going to hold that person up in prayer because they are the leader of our country.

Taya Graham:  I think you made a really interesting point. I’m a lifelong Baltimore City resident, so when it comes to public schools that need help, communities that are under siege by violence, please believe me, I know that intimately. And I thought it was interesting that you said that you did not want to be involved with politics at all.

So it makes me wonder what pulled you in? Because when you talk about schools and public schools, there is, I think, very solid criticism that some of the strategies that the Moms of Liberty organization has would actually lead to public schools becoming underfunded. So in the process of getting school choice, that it would actually lead to money leaving these public schools, putting them in an even worse situation, and then just putting money into private and religious schools that, in general, are doing better.

Advertisement

Tia Bess:  Well, I think that the power belongs to the people, and it goes back to the state level. Every state is different. Philadelphia is not Jacksonville, Florida, Philadelphia is not rural Kansas. Each state is different. But I’m a graduate of public school. I’m grateful for my teachers that actually saw that there was a need, and they sacrifice, and they really put their heart into everything.

I’ll tell you how I got started with Moms for Liberty, and just in general. Like I say, I wasn’t a political person. I have a special needs son who has autism. I was just like any Black Southern mama. I did not play about my baby. My son couldn’t hear and he couldn’t speak. So basically, I had a mute child.

I went to the school board meeting as a Democrat. And prior to going to the school board meeting, I would send emails and emails and emails, please help my son. What am I missing? And every time I would go to the school to talk to the principal, I was just another angry Black woman or someone they would see coming, they wouldn’t pay attention to me. And everyone that’s watching understand, you understand what it’s like when your voice isn’t heard, when you know that your baby is going to excel and no one will listen to you.

It was during COVID where they told me that I could mask train my son or I could potty-train my son. If I wanted to send my son back to school, brick-and-mortar, he had to be mask trained. Now you tell me how do you mask train an autistic five-year-old who is speech and hearing delayed and has sensory issues? They wanted me to send my child to school to wear a mask, a face shield, and sit behind plexiglass for 18 hours a day. And I said no, because I know what that baby needs.

Advertisement

And I spoke up. My son was excluded from field trips because he was unable to mask even though we had a medical exemption, even though he was covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act. They were treating special needs kids wrong, and they were especially treating my son wrong, and no one was speaking up for the little boys and little girls who couldn’t speak.

Taya Graham:  I really appreciate you sharing that, and I think that’s important for people to understand. Because when we were at the RNC — And this was a conversation we had off camera — I think it was a really honest conversation because people haven’t heard that aspect of your story.

I’m sure online that, you can talk about this, there is a lot of accusations of you being used by this organization, I think it’s the politest way I could put it, or that people would say that you were there for optics, that you’re being tokenized both as a Black woman and as a member of the LGBTQ community. So I was hoping maybe you could share a little bit about some of the pushback that you’ve experienced and how you respond to it.

Tia Bess:  Well, for me, when they… I’m not going to cry during this interview too. When they excluded my son from the second field trip, he was in the first grade, and he asked, Mommy, why can’t I go make candy at the candy factory with my class? And I said, oh no, you’re going on that field trip. And I took him and I paid the venue. The school harassed us the entire time at the field trip. They made us sit in the back of the auditorium because he couldn’t mask. So they made us sit in the back. And at that time, I felt like a second-class citizen. Nobody should feel like that.

Advertisement

And because I was speaking up, I had a Duval County school board member call me a token person, I mean, a racial slur. But the reason why a lot of people who look like me don’t speak up is because they’re afraid of criticism. They’re afraid of being called an Uncle Tom and everything else. But I’ve met a lot of Black people within the organization, Black and Brown people, who are tired of being unheard, who care about their kids, and they’ll take those arrows regardless.

And I know what people say. No one knew that I was in the LGBT community until I told them, because that’s not my primary identity. My main identity is I’m mom, I’m there for my child.

Taya Graham:  Let me ask you this. This conversation around being Black enough, don’t you think this rhetoric risks alienating voters? If Black Twitter is talking about it, if white people in the media are asking about this, this idea of being Black enough, it makes me go back to the one-drop rule and people being measured in sixteenths, in quarters, in eighths. To bring that up, I understand that you say you think it’s a symbol of flip-flopping, but this is the type of rhetoric that seems to divide, not unite.

Janiyah Thomas:  No, I understand what you’re saying, but I’ll say that I think that we need to focus more on removing her race and gender out of the conversation and focus more on the policies. I feel like the more we keep focusing on whether she’s Black enough, Black people have been having a conversation about who’s Black enough forever. And are we ever going to get to a conclusion? Probably not [both laugh].

Advertisement

So does it really matter in the grand scheme of things? We’re definitely not going to get to a conclusion before election day, so why are we still talking about it? I think we need to talk more about the things she’s done in the past and what she’s been doing as the vice president and what she claims she wants to do in the future.

Taya Graham:  Janiyah, that’s actually a fair point to put aside race and gender. And so let’s put it aside for a moment and have you address some of the broader concerns that Trump’s policies are divisive or harmful to American democracy.

So for example, there are Republicans like Olivia Troye who said they felt more welcomed at the DNC, arguing that they were voting for democracy rather than for Democrats. So how do you counter this narrative? What would your response be to those Republicans like Ana Navarro or Stephanie Grisham, who was a former White House press secretary? What would you say to these lifelong Republicans who say that Trump is a threat to democracy?

Janiyah Thomas:  I think that we had a traditional convention with traditional votes from the delegates. Yes, they just shoved Kamala Harris down everyone’s throat, basically, with their process. So I’ll say that I think that I don’t care as much about what they’re doing and saying at their convention on the left or whatever, and these Republicans or former Republicans going to join and vote for democracy, as they say.

Advertisement

At our convention, we had Never Trumpers for Trump, including our vice presidential candidate. We don’t talk about it a lot, but he was, at one point, a Never Trumper, and now he is on our presidential ticket with him. I think we care more about uniting the party and they care less about that. So if they feel like going to the DNC is they’re upholding democracy, then that’s their business.

But I think that most people can see that what we’ve done on our side is… Nothing about what we’ve done, nobody’s lost rights with President Trump as the president. I don’t think that that argument of upholding democracy, we’ve never done anything to do the opposite. I think, if anything, we could say the opposite about the left.

Taya Graham:  Well, I think people would assert, and actually I’ve had conversations about this because I was really excited to have the opportunity to speak with you and Tia, and they are genuinely concerned that former President Trump would not accept election results if they were not in favor. And they did point to Jan. 6 and the things he said that day and what occurred as an example of that, as well as some of his recent comments.

That’s where this pushback is coming from, from people who really are concerned that he would not accept election results and perhaps stall and stall the process.

Advertisement

Janiyah Thomas:  Again, as I said earlier, I think this is another thing that I only hear coming from the D.C. people or people in the media. I don’t think that the Jan. 6 situation is a top of mind issue for voters. I think what people care about is the economy. They care about immigration. They care about crime. Those are the biggest issues for people. I’ve never once heard a voter say Jan. 6 is a determining factor in the election for them.

Taya Graham:  Something that just came up when I told people I was going to interview you, they said the Republican Party stance on LGBTQ rights, and, of course, especially the rights of transgender individuals, is seen as regressive, and even harmful. And they were very concerned that the current GOP platform gave no specific protections for gay marriage. And I think their concern is valid because this isn’t just about the future.

I think it was back under Trump’s Department of Justice, they argued before the Supreme Court that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not protect LGBTQ+ people from workplace discrimination. So they see rulings like that.

I think there was a ruling, I think it was like Philadelphia v. Fulton back in 2021. There was an LGBTQ family that wanted to marry partners, wanted to adopt a child. This organization refused, and it was a Catholic charity, and it was justified in the Supreme Court. So people look at this and they see that underneath the guise of what they might call religious freedom, that they feel that bigotries are coming through, and that it will erode people’s rights in this country, rights that were hard fought.

Advertisement

So I would say this. How do you justify, or what would you say to people who say, this party actively works against LGBTQ community rights? How would you respond to that? For example, those Supreme Court decisions, I think, really do show a door opening there for bigotry.

Tia Bess:  Well, this is what I say. I had an anonymous, one person, send me a message on Instagram, and they asked me, they said, Tia, you’re a lesbian, and you went to an event with Lieutenant Governor Mark Robinson. And they told me, and they wanted to know, and they said, how could you come to this event when he doesn’t like gay people?

And I heard that and I said, well, you know what? When I see him, I’m going to ask him. I made sure. I actually spoke at the legislative days in South Carolina, because I said, listen, if you’ve got a problem, we can talk about this.

I pulled Lieutenant Governor Mark Robinson aside, I’ve met him multiple times, and I said, I have a question for you. I said, you see me. You know me. You met me. I said, I’m a two-mom-strong household, I said, but I believe that what you do as an adult is your personal private business, and leave the kids out of it. I said, how do you feel about that? He said, I agree with you 100%.

Advertisement

It was a conversation that we had very briefly, but I didn’t feel any type of discrimination from him. And everyone knows this. If I feel discrimination or if you treat me some different kind of way, I’m going to call it out. So if there’s people who have concerns, I want you to email me, send me a message. I’m going to go find out straight from the horse’s mouth. And if that’s how you feel, then I don’t want anything to do with you. There’s discrimination on both sides. I’ve seen it on both sides. And that’s not okay.

I’ve seen it from… And I guess it’s a person’s personal preference. I’ve seen it from Democrats, I’ve seen it from Republicans, I’ve seen it from Christians. I’ve seen it from multiple faiths. If someone has a bad experience from, it may be someone in the LGBT community or whatnot, if they have a bad experience, they’re going to judge you just when they look at you. If someone has a bad experience with Black people, the minute they see me, they’re automatically going to turn… Whether they had a violent crime from someone who was Black, they’re going to use that experience to judge you.

But I think that we all can do our part by showing people to get a chance to know us. People who are in the community, they have regular relationships. They’re not just perverted people who only think about sexual acts. No. So I mean, I tell people all the time, if there’s a question and you really feel like you want to know more, reach out to me. I’ll go always to the top and go ask. I’ll get answers.

Taya Graham:  So let me ask you about abortion and choice. Now, when I was interviewing some of the Moms of Liberty, I met a lovely woman who admitted to me off camera that she wasn’t completely pro-life and that she believed there should be exceptions for the life of the mother, rape, and incest. But I sense that she believed that her viewpoint would be frowned on by other members of your organization.

Advertisement

So I have to ask, what is Moms of Liberty’s stance on abortion? And, given the fact that the Republican Party’s increasingly hard-line stance on abortion, including J.D. Vance’s opposition to exceptions for rape or incest, how does your organization address the concerns of women who feel their rights are being stripped away?

Tia Bess:  When it comes to that issue, and that’s a very good question that you ask, I can’t speak on behalf of our organization because each woman has been through her own journey in life. I’m not here to judge anybody. I’ve never walked a mile in your shoes, nor will I try, because everyone’s been through something that has shaped them. So you’ll never hear me judge somebody for what they’re doing because I’m not you. I can’t be. I can’t live your life for you. So that’s a good question, but I won’t judge anybody. As a woman, I won’t do that.

Taya Graham:  At the DNC, there were women who came forward, one woman who nearly lost her life to an ectopic pregnancy because she couldn’t get termination services by doctors because they were afraid of prosecution. There was a very moving story of a young woman who was on stage, she’d been sexually assaulted by her stepfather, and she had to have an abortion at age 12.

So I have to ask you, hearing these women’s stories, how does the Trump administration want to move forward on this issue? Because as we’ve seen as some of these hard-line rules that have come into effect to prevent any form of abortion from six weeks onward or at all, no exceptions, rape or incest, how does the Trump administration want to move forward on this issue?

Advertisement

Sen. Vance has come out very firmly against any exceptions for rape or incest. Is there any chance that President Trump will go against some of his fellow Republicans and put his trust in women to make these decisions and choose to take government interference out of the picture? Will he choose to push aside his fellow Republicans and put his trust back in women?

Janiyah Thomas:  I’ll make this answer very short and simple because I don’t want to get into the personal stuff, but I will say that President Trump has come out and said that he’s not promoting a national abortion ban. Whether the media wants to cover it or not, he’s not doing that. And basically the point was, even with the Supreme Court case, is to leave it to the states.

So what he stands for is leaving the abortion rights, women’s rights, reproductive rights, or whatever we want to call it, is up to the states to decide.

Taya Graham:  Let me change the topic slightly and ask you about something that Moms of Liberty is well known for, which is asking for the removal of books from libraries.

Advertisement

Now, I would say this: in a time where children have access to the entire world in their pocket, there are a lot of people who think just removing these books from libraries, it’s just performative. And that, actually, it opens a dangerous story to banning books that people just dislike or find problematic.

And let me give you a small example of that. There’s a graphic novel called Maus, which describes the Holocaust, this young man writes it from his father’s viewpoint. And that book was set to be banned in Tennessee, and it was for one small image in the book where it was a shot of a woman in a bathtub. An entire book, a powerful book on the Holocaust through a child’s eyes and a father’s eyes was going to be banned.

And then I even saw for some of the Florida Moms of Liberty, some of the Judy Blume books. These are books I read as a young girl that I found helpful.

So I have to ask, I mean, what do you say to people who feel that this is a book banning and that’s an un-American thing?

Advertisement

Tia Bess:  Okay, I’m going to keep it real with you and all your viewers because that’s exactly what I do. I get to the bottom of stuff. Okay, so a prime example, which they said was To Kill a Mockingbird. People are like, oh, they’re… And that’s not so much banning, no. You can buy the books anywhere you want. Is it age appropriate? That’s we’re going to go there with, age appropriate.

But when it comes to Kill a Mockingbird, my daughter, my high schooler, just received a permission slip to read that book. I signed it. I signed it. Because when it comes to book challenges, it’s not all Moms for Liberty who are challenging books. Any concerned citizen taxpayer in that area is allowed to challenge a book. There’s a book challenge committee.

As far as… What’s the best way to put it? If there’s pornography in a book, it doesn’t belong in school. If you can’t read it out loud, it should not be in a school.

And I actually found a book at my daughter’s middle school at the time that explicitly went into details about how to perform oral acts, I’ll put it that way. Very like Fifty Shades of Grey type. And that was concerning to me because people said, no, that book isn’t there. I told my daughter to go to the library and take a picture of that book with the school’s barcode on it. And I went and I read that book aloud. If I read it in front of a stranger’s child, they would call the police on me because of how graphic and how it describes having intercourse.

Advertisement

Taya Graham:  But was this a book that was assigned to students?

Tia Bess:  It’s at the public library that you can just go pick up, and there are some…

Taya Graham:  But wouldn’t that be the responsibility of the parent to, say —

Tia Bess:  In our schools, in our county, Clay County, there is a form that we actually created, school board members. And it says, “I would like my child to check out any book, but I would like to receive an email copy of what they checked out.” That makes sense.

Advertisement

At the public school’s library, we actually came up with a solution in Clay County, okay, [inaudible]. It doesn’t sound unreasonable. You need to know, okay, my child checked out this book. And as a parent, you might supplement what they’re reading. If you’re reading about something, I want to talk to you and ask you, well, why do you feel that way? Not judgmental, but, why do you feel that way? How can I help you? Just to understand.

But that’s my right as a parent to know, what do you have questions about? I’m your mom, I mean the best interest for you. I don’t want to harm you. I want you to be the best person possible. So —

Taya Graham:  I can see, though, that some people would say, well, that seems reasonable that a parent would be informed about a book a child took out, And then there’s some people say, that’s incredibly invasive for a young person that is finding their way in the world to know that their parents might see every little thing they’re looking at.

I remember the Judy Blume book I was looking at was about puberty, and it helped answer some questions that I didn’t feel comfortable talking to the adults in my life about. But if I knew those adults would be informed about that book, I would’ve been a little less likely, perhaps, to take it out.

Advertisement

Tia Bess:  Well, I think so too, is that as parents, we got to step up our game. As parents, we’ve been asleep at the wheel. It is not the TV’s job to raise our kids. It’s not TikTok’s job, YouTube’s job. We got to put down our personal devices and actually talk with our kids. What happened to having dinner at the dinner table?

As far as the book that’s in Tennessee, I’ll research it. I will research it because I believe that there are things that do belong in the libraries. But it’s not all of Moms for Liberty that are doing book challenges. There’s other organizations that do book challenges.

Taya Graham:  There’s a good portion of Americans, and I would say this from polls as well as social media, as well as even our own comment section on YouTube, there’s a good portion of Americans that find former President Trump and Sen. Vance’s remarks insulting, even divisive.

There were Vance’s remarks on people without children not contributing to society, that they don’t have any true stake in its future. And of course, the infamous childless cat ladies remark. There are some really derogatory remarks that President Trump made about women, women who are admired journalists, whether it was April Ryan or, recently, Rachel Scott of ABC, he referred to them both as nasty. He even called Maxine Waters, Sen. Waters low IQ. So these things people do remember.

Advertisement

So how do you address concerns of voters who feel alienated and even alarmed by this rhetoric, who say, this feels to me that President Trump, Sen. Vance, they don’t respect women? How would you respond to people who remember those remarks and it hurt them?

Janiyah Thomas:  I’ll say, I think it’s important for people to do their research past a 30-second clip. I think that a lot of times, especially in these situations with candidates or just even any type of public figure, we always see on social media, or even on the news, it’s like a 30-second clip. You don’t get the whole gist of the argument.

I’m not talking about anything, one particular comment in general, but I’m saying that the left sits there and they name call, they attack President Trump all day. But if he says anything remotely negative about somebody, then it’s a whole ordeal. And it’s not fair to always have a double standard with the right and the left.

And I’ll say also that I think that…

Advertisement

Taya Graham:  Well, it’s a little different when the president of the United States calls you out as opposed to the power that a reporter might have. If the president of the United States calls you out and says that you’re nasty or that you’re low IQ, the whole world hears that. It’s not the same as somebody on social media calling him an authoritarian. I mean, that’s the power of the office.

Janiyah Thomas:  But this current administration has also attacked him personally, and they call him a racist, and that’s the narrative they like to spin around him all day. So there’s not that much of a difference between the two things, to me, if you’re attacking somebody’s character in that way.

Taya Graham:  Well, the difference, and now, this is not to go on the defense for the Biden-Harris administration by any means, but the differences are those are two sets of equals; people who both held the office of the presidency, who have wielded political power, who have money in their bank accounts. That’s different than a president calling women nasty. There are other remarks, I won’t go into detail out of respect for your time and being here, but there have been some very derogatory remarks made towards women.

Janiyah Thomas:  Well, I’ll say that, I mean, I think that we all need to, like I said, do our research and look into somebody’s past before you make an assumption about who they are as a person. I’ll say President Trump has done a lot to empower women. He’s empowered female architects in designing his buildings in the past. I mean, we have a female chief of… I mean, not chief of staff, sorry, a female campaign manager. He’s also had Kellyanne Conway as a campaign manager. He had Sarah Sanders, one of the first women and mothers to be press secretary. He’s had a bunch of powerful women around him.

Advertisement

And I think that also, even if we’re talking about Kellyanne Conway, she’s one of the first women to win a presidential election. So I think that he’s done a lot to empower women.

And I think that the narrative that they try to spin around him isn’t always fair. And I think that if people did more of their research and looked into his past, you would see he has done a lot to empower women. And I’m here, obviously so [laughs].

Taya Graham:  Well, I think the strongest case that he currently has is the fact that you’re here and you’re kind enough to spend your time with us, and we really do appreciate that.

I’ll just ask you one last question out of respect for your time, and hopefully this will give you some room to share why you support Trump’s campaign and the Republican Party so much. So I’m going to quote Civil Rights legend John Lewis here. He said, “We may have arrived on different boats, but we’re all in the same boat now.”

Advertisement

So in a time where many people believe that Trump’s rhetoric seems to divide rather than unite, how do you interpret and respond to this sentiment within your work? How do you want to communicate to Americans that Trump’s boat is big enough for all of us?

Janiyah Thomas:  I have two part answers to this. The first thing is to go based off of the quote you just stated. I think that, especially with the younger generation, our concept of collective consciousness may not be as true anymore because we have a lot of Black people that grow up in rural environments, we have Black people that grow up in the suburbs, and we have Black people in the inner city communities.

And I can say for my family, I grew up completely different than some of my cousins that are still in Virginia. So my outlook on life is completely different than theirs. So the way I vote and the way I feel politically might not always be the same as those people. And I think that it’s important for all of us to look at the issues that matter to you and vote your issues.

I’m 100% down with supporting President Trump because I care so much about the economy, and he is also one candidate that implemented the First Step Act, and that’s a huge criminal justice reform that has taken us a step in the right direction. So I can say that I think that Black people have a true champion and a leader in President Trump. And I think that our boat is for everybody.

Advertisement

We want all people here. We’re welcoming to all people. Like I said earlier, President Trump is not the traditional Republican candidate, and I think that his message and his straightforwardness resonates with a lot of people. And I think that, at least with President Trump, what you hear is what you get. He will stand on his word, and he doesn’t make promises he’s not going to keep. So I’m with President Trump because of that.

Taya Graham:  Well, today’s discussion has given us a lot to think about, and I’m really grateful that our guests were willing to let me really delve deeply into their belief systems and even test those foundations. I mean, we’ve explored the intersections of race and gender and politics through the eyes of two powerful Black women who are deeply embedded in the conservative movement. Janiyah Thomas as the Black media engagement director for Trump’s re-election campaign is focused on amplifying policies she believes will make inroads with the Black community, while Tia Bess as the national director for Moms of Liberty is advocating for her vision of family values and individual rights, even when those beliefs put her at odds with the broader LGBTQ community.

Their stories highlight the challenges of navigating identities that don’t always align with mainstream political narratives. And whether you agree or disagree with their positions, it’s clear that their voices add a dimension to the ongoing dialogue about race, gender, and politics in America. So as we close, I want to thank Janiyah and Tia for their time and for sharing their perspectives with us.

This conversation is just a small part of a much larger debate about the direction of our country and the role of diverse voices within it. If there is one thing to remember, it’s that the Black community is not a monolith. And even though the Democratic Party has been able to count on Black women as the bedrock of their vote, they should not forget this loyalty must be earned and is not guaranteed.

Advertisement

Thank you so much for joining us for what I hope will be a series of provocative conversations. I’m your host, Taya Graham, and I want to thank you so much for joining me today.

Creative Commons License

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

News

Civil Liberties at Risk Under Vietnam’s Tô Lâm

Published

on

army

On May 25, 2023, a Vietnamese court in Danang sentenced 39-year-old noodle vendor Bui Tuan Lam to six years in prison for posting an online clip deemed anti-government propaganda. Detained since 2021, Lam was isolated from his wife and children for two years before his trial drew international attention for its bizarre background and questionable legality. The dangerous video in question? A TikTok-style parody video mocking then-Minister of Public Security Tô Lâm’s extravagant culinary selection at a steakhouse in London.

One year into the food vendor’s sentence, now-President Tô Lâm’s political fortunes changed dramatically. On August 3, the former top security official was unanimously elected as Vietnam’s next Communist Party General Secretary, the most powerful position in the country. It was the culmination of his meteoric political rise, facilitated by the death of his mentor and longtime party boss Nguyen Phu Trong, in July. Pledging to build on his predecessor’s legacy, Tô Lâm made it clear that he will continue prioritizing the anti-corruption policies and security measures that defined his tenure at the Ministry of Public Security. 

However, as Bui Tuan Lam and the other 160 Vietnamese political prisoners have come to realize, Tô Lâm’s extrajudicial definition of a security threat includes public dissent, civil liberties, and even lighthearted comedy. 

Born on July 10, 1954, Tô Lâm has always prized security. After graduating from the People’s Security Academy in 1979, he held various law enforcement roles until his elevation to the Ministry of Public Security in 2016. There, he defined himself as an excellent political enforcer, leading an impressive anti-corruption campaign under Trong’s direction. Together, Lâm and Trong’s “Blazing Furnace” campaign targeted over 20,000 government officials in 2023, a dramatic increase from previous efforts. 

Advertisement

“Tô Lâm was appointed one of five deputy chairmen of the Central Steering on Anti-Corruption that was the spearhead of Trong’s blazing furnace campaign,” Carl Thayer, an emeritus professor of politics at the University of New South Wales, told me. “As Minister of Public Security, Tô Lâm was also responsible for the harassment, intimidation, arrest and imprisonment of political and civil society activists.”

To General Secretary Trong, Tô Lâm’s role in Hanoi as an enforcer quickly became apparent. In Lâm’s first week at the Ministry, the former law enforcement officer oversaw the brutal suppression of protests against Formosa Ha Tinh Steel, the company responsible for arguably the worst environmental disaster in Vietnamese history. 41 protesters were arrested, including activist Hoang Duc Binh, who was sentenced to 14 years in prison for advocating on behalf of local fishermen affected by the disaster. 

Two years later, Tô Lâm’s Ministry of Public Security significantly expanded government surveillance powers. The Law on Cyber Security, passed by the National Assembly in 2018, required telecommunication providers to record and store their users’ private data, including “full name, date of birth, place of birth, nationality, profession, position, place of residence, contact address.” Despite widespread condemnation and international outrage, the law continues to undermine Vietnamese civil liberties and online privacy. 

It’s not just democratic organizers and human rights advocates who have been targeted under Tô Lâm’s security regime. Le Trong Hung, a former middle school teacher, was arrested in 2021 after challenging General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong to a nationally televised debate. Another teacher, 43-year-old Bui Van Thuan, was also arrested that same year and sentenced to nearly a decade in prison for publicly criticizing the Communist Party. Even Lâm’s own police officers, such as Captain Le Chi Thanh, have been prosecuted for exposing corruption within the Ministry of Public Security. 

Advertisement

Tô Lâm’s self-styled campaign to root out “corruption” and enhance state security also coincidentally targeted political opponents within his own party. “Tô Lâm used the Investigative Police Department of the Ministry of Public Security to gather evidence of corruption by the President Vo Van Thuong, the Chairman of the National Assembly Vuong Dinh Hue, and the Permanent member of the party Secretariat Truong Thi Mai,” says Thayer. “These were the three most powerful figures in the leadership under General Secretary Trong. All were pressured into resigning in turn.”

Since taking office in August, General Secretary Lâm has moved quickly to solidify his position on the international stage. Last week, the Vietnamese leader visited Beijing to meet with China’s Xi Jinping, marking his first official overseas trip. The visit came nearly a year after Vietnam upgraded its diplomatic relations with both Japan and the United States. However, this continuation of former President Trong’s “Bamboo Diplomacy” should not be interpreted as a sign that Lâm intends to govern as a carbon copy of his mentor. Tô Lâm’s particularly abysmal human rights record distinguishes him as a unique threat to civil liberties and basic freedoms, further cementing a decade-long trend of increasing censorship and political persecution in Vietnam.

[Ting Cui edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Record Indian gold imports help drive bullion’s rally

Published

on

A surge in demand among Indian consumers for gold jewellery and bars after a recent cut to tariffs is helping to drive global bullion prices to a series of fresh highs.

India’s gold imports hit their highest level on record by dollar value in August at $10.06bn, according to government data released Tuesday. That implies roughly 131 tonnes of bullion imports, the sixth-highest total on record by volume, according to a preliminary estimate from consultancy Metals Focus. 

The high gold price — which is up by one-quarter since the start of the year — has traditionally deterred price-sensitive Asian buyers, with Indians reducing demand for gold jewellery in response.

But the Indian government cut import duties on gold by 9 percentage points at the end of July, triggering a renewed surge in demand in the world’s second-largest buyer of gold.

Advertisement

“The impact of the duty cut was unprecedented, it was incredible,” said Philip Newman, managing director of Metals Focus in London. “It really brought consumers in.”

The tariff cut has been a boon for Indian jewellery stores such as MK Jewels in the upmarket Mumbai suburb of Bandra West, where director Ram Raimalani said “demand has been fantastic”.

Customers were packed into the store browsing for necklaces and bangles on a recent afternoon, and Raimalani is expecting an annual sales boost of as much as 40 per cent during the multi-month festival and wedding season that runs from September to February. 

Raimalani praised India’s government and “Modi ji”, an honorific for Prime Minister Narendra Modi, for reducing gold duties.

Advertisement
Column chart of tariff cut triggers import leap last month showing Indian gold imports

Expectations of rapid interest rate cuts by the US Federal Reserve have been the main driver of gold’s huge rally this year, according to analysts. Lower borrowing costs increase the attraction of assets with no yield, such as bullion, and are also likely to weigh on the dollar, in which gold is denominated.

The Fed cut rates by half a per cent on Wednesday, pushing gold to yet another record high, just below $2,600. 

But strong demand for gold jewellery and bars, as well as buying by central banks, have also helped buoy prices. 

India accounted for about a third of gold jewellery demand last year, and has become the world’s second-largest bar and coin market, according to data from the World Gold Council, an industry body.

However, that demand has meant that domestic gold prices in India are quickly catching up to the level they were at before the tariff duty cut, according to Harshal Barot, senior research consultant at Metals Focus. 

Advertisement

“That entire benefit [of the tariff cut] has kind of vanished,” said Barot. “Now that prices are going up again, we will have to see if consumers still buy as usual.”

Jewellery buying had been flagging before the cut in import duty, with demand in India in the first half of 2024 at its lowest level since 2020, according to the World Gold Council.

India’s central bank has also been on a gold buying spree, adding 42 tonnes of gold to its reserves during the first seven months of the year — more than double its purchases for the whole of 2023. 

A person familiar with the Reserve Bank of India’s thinking called the gold purchases a “routine” part of its foreign exchange reserve and currency stability management.

Advertisement
Line chart of  showing Rate cut expectations send gold to record high

In China, the world’s biggest physical buyer of gold, high prices have meant fewer jewellery sales, but more sales of gold bars and coins, which surged 62 per cent in the second quarter compared with a year earlier.

“We observed strong positive correlation between gold investment demand and the gold price,” wrote the World Gold Council, referring to China.

All of this has helped support the physical market and mitigate the impact that high prices can have in eroding demand. 

“It acts as a stable foundation for demand,” said Paul Wong, a market strategist at Sprott Asset Management. “In parts of Asia, gold is readily convertible into currency,” making it popular for savings, he said.

Western investor demand has also been a big factor in bullion’s rally, with a net $7.6bn flowing into gold-backed exchange traded funds over the past four months. 

Advertisement

After hitting a fresh high on Wednesday, analysts warn there could be a correction in the gold price.

“When you have this scale of anticipation [of rate cuts], for this long, there is room for disappointment,” said Adrian Ash, London-based director of research at BullionVault, an online gold marketplace. “I think there is scope for a pullback in precious alongside other assets.”

Whether or not gold pulls back from its record highs, Indian jewellery demand looks set to remain strong through the coming wedding season, according to MK Jewels’ Raimalani.

Soaring prices of bullion have been no deterrent to his customers, he added. “Indians are the happiest when prices go high because they already own so much gold. It’s like an investment.”

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

News

‘Doomsday’ Glacier Is Set to Melt Faster

Published

on

‘Doomsday’ Glacier Is Set to Melt Faster

Tidal action on the underside of the Thwaites Glacier in the Antarctic will “inexorably” accelerate melting this century, according to new research by British and American scientists. The researchers warn the faster melting could destabilize the entire West Antarctic ice sheet, leading to its eventual collapse.

The massive glacier—which is roughly the size of Florida—is of particular interest to scientists because of the rapid speed at which it is changing and the impact its loss would have on sea levels (the reason for its “Doomsday” moniker). It also acts as an anchor holding back the West Antarctic ice sheet.

Warmed ocean water melts doomsday glacier faster
Yasin Demirci—Anadolu/Getty Images

More than 2 kilometers (1.2 miles) thick in places, Thwaites has been likened to a cork in a bottle. Were it to collapse, sea levels would rise by 65 centimeters (26 inches). That’s already a significant amount, given oceans are currently rising 4.6 millimeters a year. But if it led to the eventual loss of the entire ice sheet, sea levels would rise 3.3 meters.

While some computer models suggest reductions in greenhouse gas emissions under the 2015 Paris Agreement may mitigate the glacier’s retreat, the outlook for the glacier remains “grim,” according to a report by the International Thwaites Glacier Collaboration (ITGC), a project that includes researchers from the British Antarctic Survey, the U.S. National Science Foundation and the U.K.’s Natural Environment Research Council.

Thwaites has been retreating for more than 80 years but that process has accelerated in the past 30, Rob Larter, a marine geophysicist who contributed to the research, said in a news release. “Our findings indicate it is set to retreat further and faster.” Other dynamics that aren’t currently incorporated into large-scale models could speed up its demise, the new research shows. 

Advertisement

Using a torpedo-shaped robot, scientists determined that the underside of Thwaites is insulated by a thin layer of cold water. However, in areas where the parts of the glacier lift off the seabed and the ice begins to float, tidal action is pumping warmer sea water, at high pressure, as far as 10 kilometers under the ice. The process is disrupting that insulating layer and will likely significantly speed up how fast the grounding zone—the area where the glacier sits on the seabed—retreats.

A similar process has been observed on glaciers in Greenland.

The group also flagged a worst-case scenario in which 100-meter-or-higher ice cliffs at the front of Thwaites are formed and then rapidly calve off icebergs, causing runaway glacial retreat that could raise sea levels by tens of centimeters in this century. However, the researchers said it’s too early to know if such scenarios are likely.

A key unanswered question is whether the loss of Thwaites Glacier is already irreversible. Heavy snowfalls, for example, regularly occur in the Antarctic and help replenish ice loss, Michelle Maclennan, a climate scientist with the University of Colorado at Boulder, explained during a news briefing. “The problem though is that we have this imbalance: There is more ice loss occurring than snowfall can compensate for,” she said. 

Advertisement

Increased moisture in the planet’s atmosphere, caused by global warming evaporating ocean waters, could result in more Antarctic snow—at least for a while. At a certain point, though, that’s expected to switch over to rain and surface melting on the ice, creating a situation where the glacier is melting from above and below. How fast that happens depends in part on nations’ progress to slow climate change.

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

David Lammy seeks emergency boost to aid cash to offset rising cost of migrant hotels

Published

on

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Britain’s foreign secretary David Lammy is pushing for an emergency top-up to development spending as ballooning costs of supporting asylum seekers threaten to drain overseas aid to its lowest level since 2007.

The UK government spent £4.3bn hosting asylum seekers and refugees in Britain in the last financial year, more than a quarter of its £15.4bn overseas aid budget, according to official data. This more than consumed the £2.5bn increases in the aid budget scheduled between 2022 and 2024 by former Conservative chancellor Jeremy Hunt.

Advertisement

People familiar with Lammy’s thinking say he fears that if Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, resists calls to at least match Hunt’s offer, the aid budget will be further eviscerated, undermining the government’s ambitions on the global stage.

Currently, the housing of asylum seekers in hotels is controlled by the Home Office but largely paid for out of the aid budget, a set-up introduced in 2010 when spending on the programme was relatively modest.

In the longer term, development agencies and some Foreign Office officials want the costs capped or paid for by the Home Office itself.

However, such a move would be politically fraught, the people said, as it would require billions of pounds of extra funding for the Home Office at a time the government is preparing widespread cuts across departments.

Advertisement

Sir Keir Starmer, the prime minister, is due to attend a string of upcoming international events, starting with the UN general assembly this month, then a Commonwealth summit in Samoa, a G20 meeting in Brazil, and COP-29 climate talks in Azerbaijan later this autumn.

International partners will be looking at these meetings for signs that the change of government in the UK marks a change in direction on development.

Britain’s leading role was eroded by Rishi Sunak after he cut the previously ringfenced spending from 0.7 per cent of gross national income to 0.5 per cent when he was chancellor in 2020.

“When he turns up at the UN next week and the G20 and COP a few weeks later, the PM has a unique opportunity to reintroduce the UK under Labour as a trustworthy partner that sees the opportunity of rebooting and reinvesting in a reformed fairer international financial system,” said Jamie Drummond, co-founder of aid advocacy group One.

Advertisement

“But to be that trusted partner you need to be an intentional investor — not an accidental cutter.”

Speaking on Tuesday in a speech outlining UK ambitions to regain a leading role in the global response to climate change, Lammy said the government wanted to get back to spending 0.7 per cent of GNI on overseas aid but that it could not be done overnight.   

“Part of the reason the funding has not been there is because climate has driven a migration crisis,” he said. “We have ended up in this place where we made a choice to spend development aid on housing people across the country and having a huge accommodation and hotel bill as a consequence,” he said.

Under OECD rules, some money spent in-country on support for refugees and asylum seekers can be classified as aid because it constitutes a form of humanitarian assistance.

Advertisement

But the amount the UK has been spending on refugees from its aid budget has shot up from an average of £20mn a year between 2009-2013 to £4.3bn last year, far more than any other OECD donor country, according to Bond, the network of NGOs working in international development.

Spending per refugee from the aid budget has also risen from an average of £1,000 a year in 2009-2013 to around £21,500 in 2021, largely as a result of the use of hotels to accommodate asylum seekers.

The Independent Commission for Aid Impact watchdog argues that the Home Office has had little incentive to manage the funds carefully because they come from a different department’s budget.

In her July 29 speech outlining the dire fiscal straits that Labour inherited from the previous Conservative government, Reeves projected the cost of the asylum system would rise to £6.4bn this year.

Advertisement

Labour was hoping to cut this by at least £800mn, she said, by ending plans to deport migrants to Rwanda. A Home Office official said the government was also ensuring that asylum claims were dealt with faster and those ineligible deported quickly.

But the Foreign Office projects that on current trends, overseas aid as a proportion of UK income (when asylum costs are factored in) will drop to 0.35 per cent of national income by 2028.

Without emergency funding to plug the immediate cost of housing tens of thousands of migrants in hotels, that will happen as soon as this year, according to Bond, bringing overseas aid levels to their lowest as a proportion of national income, since 2007.

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office said: “The UK’s future [official development assistance] budget will be announced at the Budget. We would not comment on speculation.”

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

News

AI translation now ‘good enough’ for Economist to deploy

Published

on

AI translation now 'good enough' for Economist to deploy

The Economist has deployed AI-translated content on its budget-friendly “snack-sized” app Espresso after deciding the technology had reached the “good enough” mark.

Ludwig Siegele, senior editor for AI initiatives at The Economist, told Press Gazette that AI translation will never be a “solved problem”, especially in journalism because it is difficult to translate well due to its cultural specificities.

However he said it has reached the point where it is good enough to have introduced AI-powered, in-app translations in French, German, Mandarin and Spanish on The Economist’s “bite-sized”, cut-price app Espresso (which has just over 20,000 subscribers).

Espresso has also just been made free to high school and university students aged 16 and older globally as part of a project by The Economist to make its journalism more accessible to audiences around the world.

Siegele said that amid “lots of hype” about AI, the questions to ask are: “What is it good for? Does it work? And does it work with what we’re trying to do?”

Advertisement


He added that the project to make The Economist’s content “more accessible to more people” via Espresso was a “good point to start”.

Content from our partners
Advertisement

“The big challenge of AI is the technology, at least for us, is not good enough,” he continued. “It’s interesting, but to really develop a product, I think in many cases, it’s not good enough yet. But in that case, it worked.

“I wouldn’t say that translation is a solved problem, it is never going to be a solved problem, especially in journalism, because journalism is really difficult to translate. But it’s good enough for that type of content.”

The Economist is using AI translation tool DeepL alongside its own tech on the backend.

“It’s quite complicated,” Siegele said. “The translation is the least of it at this point. The translation isn’t perfect. If you look at it closely it has its quirks, but it’s pretty good. And we’re working on a kind of second workflow which makes it even better.”

Advertisement

The AI-translated text is not edited by humans because, Siegele said, the “workflow is so tight” on Espresso which updates around 20 times a day.

“There is no natural thing where we can say ‘okay, now everything is done. Let’s translate, and let’s look at the translations and make sure they’re perfect’. That doesn’t work… The only thing we can do is, if it’s really embarrassing, we’ll take it down and the next version in 20 minutes will be better.”

One embarrassing example, Siegele admitted, is that the tool turned German Chancellor Olaf Scholz into a woman.

But Siegele said a French reader has already got in touch to say: “I don’t read English. This is great. Finally, I can read The Economist without having to put it into Google Translate and get bad translations.”

Advertisement

The Economist’s AI-translated social videos

The Economist simultaneously launched AI-translated videos on its social platforms in the same four languages.

The videos are all a maximum of 90 seconds meaning it is not too much work to check them – crucial as, unlike the Espresso article translations, they are edited by humans (native language speakers working for The Economist) taking about 15 minutes per video.

For the videos The Economist is using AI video tool Hey Gen. Siegele said: “The way that works is you give them the original video and they do a provisional translation and then you can proofread the translation. So whereas the translations for the app are basically automatic – I mean, we can take them down and we will be able to change them, but at this point, they’re completely automatic – videos are proofread, and so in this way we can make sure that the translations are really good.”

In addition they are using “voice clones” which means journalists who speak in a video have some snippets of themselves given to Hey Gen to build and that is used to create the finished product.

Advertisement

The voice clones are not essential, Siegele explained, as translations can be done automatically regardless. Journalists can opt out of having their voices used in this way, and any data stored will be deleted if the employee leaves The Economist. But the clones do mean the quality is “much better”.

They have a labelling system for the app articles and videos that can show they are “AI translated” or “AI transformed”. But, Siegele said, they are “not going to have a long list of AI things we may have used to build this article for brainstorming or fact checking or whatever, because in the end it’s like a tool, it’s like Google search. We are still responsible, and there’s almost always a human except for edge cases like the Espresso translations or with podcast transcripts…”

Economist ‘will be strategic’ when choosing how to roll out AI

Asked whether the text translation could be rolled out to more Economist products, Siegele said: “That’s of course a goal but it remains to be seen.”

He said that although translation for Espresso is automated, it would not be the goal to do the same throughout The Economist.

Advertisement

He also said they still have to find out if people are “actually interested” and if they can “develop a translation engine that is good enough”.

“But I don’t think we will become a multi-linguistic, multi-language publication anytime soon. We will be much more strategic with what we what we translate… But I think there is globally a lot of demand for good journalism, and if the technology makes it possible, why not expand the access to our content?

“If it’s not too expensive – and it was too expensive before. It’s no longer.”

Other ways The Economist is experimenting with AI, although they have not yet been implemented, include a style bot and fact-checking.

Advertisement

Expect to see “some kind of summarisation” of articles, Siegele continued, “which probably will go beyond the five bullet points or three bullet points you increasingly see, because that’s kind of table stakes. People expect that. But there are other ways of doing it”.

He also suggested some kind of chatbot but “not an Economist GPT – that’s difficult and people are not that interested in that. Perhaps more narrow chatbots”. And said versioning, or repurposing articles for different audiences or different languages, could also follow.

“The usual stuff,” Siegele said. “There’s only so many good ideas out there. We’re working on all of them.” But he said he wants colleagues to come up with solutions to their problems rather than him as “the AI guy” imposing things.

Advertisement

Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our “Letters Page” blog

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Kentucky sheriff held over fatal shooting of judge in court

Published

on

Kentucky sheriff held over fatal shooting of judge in court

A Kentucky sheriff has been arrested after fatally shooting a judge in his chambers, police say.

District Judge Kevin Mullins died at the scene after being shot multiple times in the Letcher County Courthouse, Kentucky State Police said.

Letcher County Sheriff Shawn Stines, 43, has been charged with one count of first-degree murder.

The shooting happened on Thursday after an argument inside the court, police said, but they have not yet revealed a motive.

Advertisement

Officials said Mullins, 54, was shot multiple times at around 14:00 local time on Thursday at the court in Whitesburg, Kentucky, a small rural town about 150 miles (240km) south-east of Lexington.

Sheriff Stines was arrested at the scene without incident, Kentucky State Police said. They did not reveal the nature of the argument before the shooting.

According to local newspaper the Mountain Eagle, Sheriff Stines walked into the judge’s outer office and told court employees that he needed to speak alone with Mullins.

The two entered the judge’s chambers, closing the door behind them. Those outside heard gun shots, the newspaper reported.

Advertisement

Sheriff Stines reportedly walked out with his hands up and surrendered to police. He was handcuffed in the courthouse foyer.

The state attorney general, Russell Coleman, said in a post on X, formerly Twitter, that his office “will fully investigate and pursue justice”.

Kentucky State Police spokesman Matt Gayheart told a news conference that the town was shocked by the incident

“This community is small in nature, and we’re all shook,” he said.

Advertisement

Mr Gayheart said that 50 employees were inside the court building when the shooting occurred.

No-one else was hurt. A school in the area was briefly placed on lockdown.

Kentucky Supreme Court Chief Justice Laurance B VanMeter said he was “shocked by this act of violence”.

Announcing Judge Mullins’ death on social media, Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear said: “There is far too much violence in this world, and I pray there is a path to a better tomorrow.”

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2017 Zox News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by WordPress.