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

All Creatures Great and Small fans 'crying' as James Herriot bids farewell after heartbreaking death

Published

on

All Creatures Great and Small fans 'crying' as James Herriot bids farewell after heartbreaking death


All Creatures Great and Small viewers were left in tears on Thursday night as James Herriot (Nicholas Ralph) was away from Skeldale and his love Helen

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Federal Reserve puts on enormous party hat

Published

on

This is an audio transcript of the Unhedged podcast episode: ‘Federal Reserve puts on enormous party hat

Katie Martin
A great moment in history has arrived. Rob Armstrong was right about something. Quite against the run of play — shush, Rob — quite against the run of play, the Federal Reserve has cut interest rates — hurrah — from the highest level in decades, and for the first time since the pandemic. And what’s more, it went large, cutting by half-a-point, precisely as my esteemed colleague had predicted.

What kind of voodoo is this? Does the Fed know something horrible we don’t? Cutting by half-a-point is normally a crisis measure, a cry for help. Should we panic about a recession? And really, Rob was right. End times.

Today on the show, we’re going to explain how come investors are ignoring the usual script and taking this bumper cut as a good thing. This is Unhedged, the markets and finance podcast from the Financial Times and Pushkin. I’m Katie Martin, a markets columnist here at FT Towers in London. And listeners, I must tell you, the saddest of things has happened. I’m joined by Rob Armstrong, lord of the Unhedged newsletter. But the sad thing is he’s dialling in from his sickbed. Rob, I’m sorry, you’re poorly.

Advertisement

Robert Armstrong
I am poorly. It’s terrible. But on a 50-basis-point day, the dead shall rise from their graves. The angels shall sing. And we all . . . we’re all gonna talk about it.

Katie Martin
Yes. Good, strong Barry White vibes I’m getting from this voice you’re busting out today. So, as you say, half a percentage point from the Fed; that’s 50 basis points in market money. Normally central banks love being super boring and they normally move by quarter-point increments. So, I mean, was it the shock of being right about the 50-basis-point thing that pushed you over the edge into sickness?

Robert Armstrong
It could have been. I’m so accustomed to getting this wrong now that it was really paralysing. However, I think, you know, you mentioned earlier, why is the market kind of taking this in stride and seeing this as a good thing? And I think it’s a bit of a communications success by the Fed in that they told the story about this, that they’re not doing this because they have to, because it’s an emergency. They’re doing it because they can.

Katie Martin
So gangster.

Advertisement

Robert Armstrong
And the reason they can is because they’ve kind of beaten inflation. Right?

Katie Martin
So for people who, unlike us, have a life and don’t sit around watching central bank press conferences, the way this works is they do the decision, they say, here you are, here’s your 25 or 50 whatever basis points, or we’re on hold. This time around, it was 50 basis points.

And then just a little while later, there’s a press conference where the chairman, Jay Powell, gets up in front of like all of the kind of most pointy headed Fed journalists in the world and fields whatever questions. There’s a statement, and then he field whatever questions they want to throw at him. And this for him was the point of highest danger, because the risk of giving the impression somehow that . . . 

Robert Armstrong
Yes.

Advertisement

Katie Martin
Yeah, we’re really worried. That’s why we’ve done 50. That was a serious risk, right? But instead, what happened?

Robert Armstrong
Well, right from the press release announcing the 50 basis cut, they tweaked the language in the press release so that it was more affirmative and strong on the topic of inflation. We’re really pleased how it’s going on inflation.

Katie Martin
Right, right.

Robert Armstrong
And then in the press release, I mean in the press conference, he just reinforced that point again and again. The line he repeated was the labour market is fine, it’s healthy. It is at a good level. We don’t need it to get any better. We’re not trying to improve it, but we have the freedom to make sure it stays as good as it is.

Advertisement

And that message seems to have gone through. Markets didn’t move yesterday afternoon. And as a very, you know, opening minutes of trading this morning, stocks are up. So that message seems to have gotten through.

Katie Martin
Yeah. That is skills, actually. You know, I will hand it to them. Because, you know, it’s . . . we’ve said this before on this podcast. Like, it’s so easy to like throw stones and peanuts at the Fed or the European Central Bank, the Bank of England or whatever and say they messed this up. But, like, this stuff is hard. Getting the markets to come away with that sort of impression is not to be taken for granted.

Robert Armstrong
It’s not to be taken for granted. I agree. However, I will note any time you’re trying to spin a narrative and you want people to believe it, one thing that really helps is if the narrative is true. And in this case, I think it broadly is.

I think inflation really does look like it’s whipped. It’s really either at or very close to 2 per cent. And look, with an unemployment rate of 4.2 per cent and basically no increase in lay-offs and the economy is still adding jobs, I think the economy is pretty good. So it’s not like he had to spin a magical tale of unicorns and wizards here. He just had to, you know, make a case based on the facts.

Advertisement

Katie Martin
Yeah. And and that kind of goes back to the fact that the Fed is not quite like all the central banks in that it has to look after inflation, but it also has to look after the jobs market. And so, you know, again, the risk is that you come away from a decision like this and think, well, you know, those little cracks that we’ve seen in the jobs market, maybe they’re the start of something really big and hairy and awful, but he seems to have massaged this one away.

Robert Armstrong
Indeed. Impressive performance.

Katie Martin
And so the other thing they do in this press conference is they give the general public and sad nerds like us a little bit of a taster about what’s coming next from the Fed, right. So they’re always, like, central bankers are at pains to say none of this stuff is a promise. This is just our kind of best current understanding of the state of the universe. But so, then you end up with this thing called — drumroll — the dot.

Robert Armstrong
The dot plot.

Advertisement

Katie Martin
The dot plot. Explain for normal people what the dot plot is.

Robert Armstrong
OK. So it’s kind of a grid. And along the bottom are the years 2024 through 2027, and then another column for the infinite future. And then there’s a range of interest rates going up and down on the side. And every member of the monetary policy committee puts a little dot in each year column where they think the rate is gonna be in that year. Cue much speculation about what all this means, how they’ve changed their mind since the last dot plot and, you know, the implications of all of this.

Katie Martin
Whose dot is whose? We’ll never know.

Robert Armstrong
They don’t reveal whose dot is whose. That’s an important point. And by the way, Katie, according to everything we hear out of the Fed, having invented this device, which was supposed to increase clarity and make everyone’s life easier, everyone in the Fed now hates it and wishes it would go away . . . 

Advertisement

Katie Martin
Damn you, dot plot!

Robert Armstrong
Because it just causes endless, idiotic little niggling questions from people like me and you. But once you’ve invented something like this, if you take it away, people get upset.

Katie Martin
So you look at the dots and you look at what Jay Powell was saying at the press conference and what does it all add up to? Does it mean that, like, OK, they’ve started with 50 basis points, so like 50 is the new 25? Get used to it, boys and girls?

Robert Armstrong
If you look at the dot plot and their kind of aggregate expectations of where rates are gonna go, it is not that 50 is the new 25. The implication is that the rate of cuts is going to be very measured — or might I say stately, from here until they reach their target.

Advertisement

Katie Martin
Right, right.

Robert Armstrong
And, you know, another point to mention here is where they think they need to go is very important. That’s the kind of last part of the dot plot is, like, where should interest rates be when everything is normal again?

Katie Martin
Because that will happen one day. And . . . 

Robert Armstrong
Yeah, that will happen. They think it’s gonna happen sometime around 2026, 27. We’ll get to where it’s about normal and they’re looking for about 3 per cent rates in the long run and that . . . so that’s where we’re going to. Just to set the context, we cut from 5.5 per cent to 5 per cent yesterday. And the map of the dot plot shows us moving towards a little under 3 per cent over time. And it’s a matter of how quickly are we going to get there, and along the way, are we going to change our mind and decide we have to go somewhere else?

Advertisement

Katie Martin
Yeah. So is there a kind of joyful hope that maybe the Fed could be, like, boring again and it can just sort of do 25 basis points here and there and just take this kind of glide path lowering rates that doesn’t get people excited any more?

Robert Armstrong
Well, this is the problem about the future is that it is hard to predict and particularly hard to predict with interest rates. The issue is that the economy, the structure of the economy has changed a lot in the last couple of years because of the pandemic and for other reasons. So that final destination point I talked about, which economists call the neutral rate, which is the just normal, everything is boring and steady rate of interest in the economy where everyone has a job, there’s no inflation, everything’s cool, the neutral rate. We don’t know what that number is.

And Jay Powell has this line about it. We know it by its works. And what that means, stated less calmly, is we know it when we screw it up. In other words, we hit it, we go past it. We push interest rates above the neutral rate and stocks have a big puke and the economy starts to slow down and people get fired or we travel too far below it and inflation starts again. So like the Fed over the next couple of years is like walking down this passage in the complete dark and it knows it can’t touch the wall on its left or the wall on its right. Right? But it doesn’t know the shape of the passageway, what direction it’s supposed to go. So it’s just like, well, I sure hope we’re going this way. Dee-dee-dee. And hope it doesn’t hit too low or too high along the way.

Katie Martin
Hope it doesn’t just walk into a wall.

Advertisement

Robert Armstrong
The history of interest rates is history of feeling your way along in the dark.

Katie Martin
Rob, that’s the most lyrical thing I’ve ever heard you say.

Robert Armstrong
Isn’t it? It’s poetry. It’s because I’m so ill. These could be the final words of a dying man.

Katie Martin
What meds are you on for this cold you’ve got?

Advertisement

Robert Armstrong
This could be my legacy, Katie. (Laughter)

Katie Martin
I feel like we should kind of wrap up quite soon before you just like expire during the recording.

Robert Armstrong
I do. As much as I like you, I’d like to have a few words with my wife before I shove off.

Katie Martin
But I will ask you, are we ever going back to like zero interest rates, do you think? Or are we gonna look back on that…

Advertisement

Robert Armstrong
I feel like I’ve been asking a lot of questions. This is a great question, Katie, but let me push it back on you. We had this wild period in the last decade where there was like a gajillion dollars of sovereign bonds issued at a negative interest rate.

Katie Martin
I think that was something like $18tn or something.

Robert Armstrong
Money was free. It was bonkers. And it was like the Fed funds rate was up against zero. Money was free. We were all in Silicon Valley inventing start-ups whatever, doing our thing. Do you think we’re going back to that? Like once this incident, the pandemic and everything after is over, are we going back?

Katie Martin
I mean, I can’t see it. I buy the narratives that are kicking around about inflation now being structurally higher, right? There’s a climate emergency. There’s a global defence emergency. There is all sorts of things that governments need to spend lots of money on, borrow lots of money for, all things being equal. And then there’s the whole supply chain thing after COVID and with geopolitics yada-yada.

Advertisement

Robert Armstrong
And the world is getting older, right? And so when old people create demand for savings, that drives interest rates up, right?

Katie Martin
Ah, old people. Yeah.

Robert Armstrong
Old people.

Katie Martin
But I think also before we wrap up, we should note that although you were right, about 50 basis points, I was right about the timing. I said on this here very podcast back in, I think it was June 2023, the . . . Not 24. 23. That the Fed is not gonna cut rates till the third quarter this year. So what I’m saying is I’m the genius here. You’re just like a (overlapping speech) took a coin flip.

Advertisement

Robert Armstrong
You’re basically Cassandra. Doomed to see the future and not be believed.

Katie Martin
I’m going to . . . 

Robert Armstrong
Do I have the right mythological figure there? I think that was Cassandra.

Katie Martin
Absolutely no idea. But I’m going to set up a hedge fund called like hunch capital where I can invest your money for two and 20. (Laughter) Based on nothing but pure hunches. Do you want in? Because like my hunch on that, your hunch on the other. I think we’re going to make good money.

Advertisement

Robert Armstrong
We could. We could be rich people, Katie. But I will answer your question seriously. I think interest rates are higher now. We’re not going back to zero. I will end on that serious point.

Katie Martin
Yeah, yeah.

Robert Armstrong
Governments are spending too much. They have to spend too much. There’s loads of old people. There’s the green stuff has to be funded. Productivity might be rising possibly because of AI. We are going into a higher interest rate world. And by the way, the Fed thinks that. If you look at the history of the Fed’s view of what the long term normal interest rate is, that has been steadily ticking higher over the last year and a half or so.

Katie Martin
So rates have come down already pretty hard, but don’t get yourself carried away with thinking that we’re going back to zero, because ain’t . . . I mean.

Advertisement

Robert Armstrong
No. Ain’t gonna happen. Nope.

Katie Martin
Ain’t gonna happen.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

On that bombshell, we’re going to be back in a sec with Long/Short.

Advertisement

[MUSIC PLAYING]

OK, now it’s time for Long/Short, that part of the show where we go long a thing we love, short a thing we hate. Rob, I feel like you should go first before you completely lose your voice. (Laughter)

Robert Armstrong
Well, I’m going to go short wellbeing. And I say this not because my wellbeing is poor right now, but because of an article our colleague Joshua Franklin, wrote in the Financial Times yesterday that says, I’m quoting here, JPMorgan Chase has tasked one of its bankers with overseeing the company’s junior banker program, a response to renewed concerns about working conditions for young employees. And it goes on that this poor person is gonna have to make sure all these young investment bankers are happy and have work-life balance. I think investment bankers owe it to the rest of us to be miserable.

Katie Martin
Right.

Advertisement

Robert Armstrong
They make a lot of money. They are the lords of the universe. They should not be happy. Their wellbeing should be awful. And that’s what you’re getting paid for. So I think JPMorgan Chase is doing the wrong thing here. And they need to appoint a banker to oversee the what’s the opposite of wellbeing. Unwell being of their junior bankers.

Katie Martin
You’re a very, very mean person and you just want everyone to be sad like you.

Robert Armstrong
No, if you want to be happy, become a journalist and make no money. If you want to be rich, become a banker and like get divorced and have your kids hate you. It’s just the normal way of life. (Laughter)

Katie Martin
Well, I am long European banking merger drama. So if you’ve missed it, the German government is, like, quite scratchy and unhappy about a potential takeover of Commerzbank by Italy’s UniCredit. It’s the talk of the town. Everyone is kind of, you know, huddled around in bars in the city asking like, how the hell did UniCredit manage to amass like a nine per cent stake in this thing? Like that doesn’t seem like a good strategic move. There’s a lot of excitement over the motives. My interest here is that this is just like the good old days of European banking mergers with like very important European bankers wearing gilets under their jackets going around in like big fast cars and, you know, chatting away on their mobile phones and being masters of the universe.

Advertisement

Robert Armstrong
I just wish they would get along with it. As far as I know, in continental Europe, there’s actually more banks than people.

Katie Martin
Yeah, it’s like sheep in New Zealand. You’ve just got . . . (Laughter)

Robert Armstrong
They just need. I mean, as long as I’ve been in finance, people have been rattling on about how banking in Europe was going to consolidate. The industry was finally going to make some. They just need . . . I mean, as long as I’ve been in finance, people have been rattling on about how banking in Europe was going to consolidate. The industry was finally going to make some money and it was going be able to compete with the US. And then it’s like, you know, some Germans get mad at some Italians, it never happens and the cycle turns again.

Katie Martin
Yeah, it’s like we want consolidation, but no, no, no, no, no. Not like that.

Advertisement

Robert Armstrong
Not like that.

Katie Martin
Anything but that.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

And I am here for the drama is all I’m saying.

Advertisement

Robert Armstrong
Right on. I love it.

Katie Martin
OK, listeners, we are going to be back in your feed on Tuesday if Rob makes it that long, but listen up anyway, wherever you get your podcasts.

Unhedged is produced by Jake Harper and edited by Bryant Urstadt. Our executive producer is Jacob Goldstein. We had additional help from Topher Forhecz. Cheryl Brumley is the FT’s global head of audio. Special thanks to Laura Clarke, Alastair Mackie, Gretta Cohn and Natalie Sadler. FT premium subscribers can get the Unhedged newsletter for free. A 30-day free trial is available to everyone else. Just go to FT.com/unhedgedoffer. I’m Katie Martin. Thanks for listening.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Republicans assess potential fallout for Trump from North Carolina bombshell

Published

on

Republicans assess potential fallout for Trump from North Carolina bombshell

Republicans in North Carolina and nationally are assessing the potential fallout for former President Donald Trump from a bombshell report alleging that Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, the party’s gubernatorial nominee, posted disturbing and inflammatory statements on a forum of a pornographic website.

CNN reported Thursday that Robinson, behind an anonymous username he allegedly used elsewhere, made the comments more than a decade ago, including supporting slavery, calling himself a “black NAZI” and recalling memories of him “peeping” on women in the shower as a 14-year-old.

ABC News has not independently verified the comments were made by Robinson, and he insisted in a video posted to X prior to the story’s publication that “those are not the words of Mark Robinson.”

But Robinson, a Donald Trump ally, already has a history of incendiary remarks about Jews, gay people and others, and elections in North Carolina, one of the nation’s marquee swing states, rest on a knife’s edge, raising questions of how much the latest news will impact his race and other Republicans on the ballot with him — including the former president.

Advertisement

“I think this only heightens the level of toxicity that the Robinson campaign has, and the real question becomes, what’s the radioactive fallout at the top of the ticket along with down the ballot for Republicans here in North Carolina?” asked Michael Bitzer, the Politics Department chair at Catawba College.

“This cannot be something that the voters aren’t going to recognize and probably play more into softening the Republican support. Is it isolated only to Robinson’s campaign, or does it start to impact Trump? Does it impact other statewide executive Republicans as well? We’ll just have to wait and see, but this feels like a pretty significant event in North Carolina politics.”

MORE: Republicans step up effort to change Nebraska’s electoral vote process to benefit Trump

Robinson, who casts himself as a conservative family man and is running for North Carolina’s open governorship against Democratic state Attorney General Josh Stein, is already behind in the polls.

Advertisement
PHOTO: Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, R-NC., speaking on the first day of the Republican National Convention, July 15, 2024, in Milwaukee. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)

PHOTO: Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, R-NC., speaking on the first day of the Republican National Convention, July 15, 2024, in Milwaukee. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)

While he holds statewide office and has broad name recognition, Robinson boasts a highly controversial record, including calling the Holocaust “hogwash” and homosexuality “filth,” and he drew claims of hypocrisy when he admitted this year that he had paid for his wife to get an abortion, seemingly in contrast with his stated opposition to the procedure, which he’d previously likened to “murder” and “genocide.”

North Carolina’s gubernatorial race is still considered competitive given the state’s tight partisan divide, but Republicans in the state told ABC News they had already viewed him as trailing, and that Thursday’s report won’t help.

“He’s already got a lengthy history of publishing comments like that on the internet. These are perhaps a little more graphic. In terms of does this by itself serve as a guillotine, I don’t know. But it feels like the cumulative weight is starting to add up now,” said one North Carolina GOP strategist. “It flies in the face of everything he presents of himself publicly. So, cumulatively plus the hypocrisy of this, it’s obviously hurtful to him.”

Republicans were more divided on what it means beyond Robinson’s own candidacy.

Advertisement

North Carolina is a must-win state for Trump, and losing it would impose significant pressure on him to perform in other swing states.

Trump is already running ahead of Robinson — while polls show Robinson trailing, they also show a neck-and-neck race in the state between the former president and Vice President Kamala Harris. The main question now is whether the news depresses Republican turnout in a state where even a small nudge in turnout one way or the other can make decide the victor.

“[Robinson] was already toast. The question is if it hurts Trump, something the campaign is very worried about,” said Doug Heye, a veteran GOP strategist with experience working in North Carolina. “It doesn’t directly cost him voters, but his endorsed pick continues to be a big distraction and has no money to drive out the vote.”

“He’s a baby blue anchor around Trump’s chances in the Tar Heel State,” added Trump donor Dan Eberhart. “This is not good news for Trump’s campaign at all.”

Advertisement
PHOTO: North Carolina Lieutenant Governor Mark Robinson speaks at the Faith and Freedom Road to Majority conference at the Washington Hilton on June 21, 2024 in Washington, D.C. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images, FILE)

PHOTO: North Carolina Lieutenant Governor Mark Robinson speaks at the Faith and Freedom Road to Majority conference at the Washington Hilton on June 21, 2024 in Washington, D.C. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images, FILE)

Democrats are already seizing on the news to try to connect Robinson to Trump, who has repeatedly praised him, even calling him at one point “Martin Luther King on steroids.”

Kamala HQ, an X page that serves as one of the Harris campaign’s rapid response tools, posted a slate of videos featuring Trump speaking positively about Robinson.

“His campaign was toast before this story, so the real impact is on all of the Republicans who have endorsed and campaigned alongside him,” said Bruce Thompson, a North Carolina Democratic fundraiser.

However, Trump has been able to navigate his own headwinds, including felony convictions in New York, questioning Harris’ race and more to remain the leader of his party and a viable presidential candidate, leading some Republicans to doubt that Robinson’s struggles will impact the presidential campaign.

Advertisement

MORE: Uncommitted movement declines to endorse Harris, but encourages against Trump, third-party votes

“Doubt it impacts at all down-ballot,” said Dave Carney, a GOP strategist who chairs a pro-Trump super PAC.

“I don’t think it helps, but it won’t hurt,” added Sean Spicer, Trump’s first White House press secretary.

PHOTO: Mark Robinson, Lt. Governor of N.C. and candidate for Governor, delivers remarks prior to Republican presidential nominee former President Trump speaking at a campaign event at Harrah's Cherokee Center on Aug. 14, 2024 in Asheville, N.C. (Grant Baldwin/Getty Images)

PHOTO: Mark Robinson, Lt. Governor of N.C. and candidate for Governor, delivers remarks prior to Republican presidential nominee former President Trump speaking at a campaign event at Harrah’s Cherokee Center on Aug. 14, 2024 in Asheville, N.C. (Grant Baldwin/Getty Images)

Trump campaign spokesperson Karoline Leavitt sounded a confident note, saying in a statement that the former president’s team would “not take our eye off the ball.”

Advertisement

“President Trump’s campaign is focused on winning the White House and saving this country. North Carolina is a vital part of that plan. We are confident that as voters compare the Trump record of a strong economy, low inflation, a secure border, and safe streets, with the failures of Biden-Harris, then President Trump will win the Tarheel State once again,” she said.”

Still, sources familiar with the matter said the Trump campaign was bracing for a story to come out about Robinson and is planning on putting more distance between the former president and the embattled nominee Robinson — but initially did not have plans to call on him to drop out.

“He seems to not be impacted by what’s going on down-ballot underneath him,” the North Carolina Republican strategist said of Trump. “There’s no way it helps him. But does it hurt him? I don’t know, I think that’s an open question.”

Republicans assess potential fallout for Trump from North Carolina bombshell originally appeared on abcnews.go.com

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

News

A Global Crackdown on Freedom of Expression

Published

on

By Robin Andersen, Nolan Higdon, and Steve Macek

According to a 2022 report by Article 19, an international organization that documents and champions freedom of expression, 80 percent of the world’s population lives with less freedom of expression today than did ten years ago. The eradication of basic freedoms and rights is partly due to the pervasive normalization of censorship. Across media platforms, news outlets, schools, universities, libraries, museums, and public and private spaces, governments, powerful corporations, and influential pressure groups are suppressing freedom of expression and censoring viewpoints deemed to be unpopular or dangerous. Unfortunately, physical assaults, legal restrictions, and retaliation against journalists, students, and faculty alike have become all too common, resulting in the suppression of dissenting voices and, more broadly, the muffling and disappearance of critical information, controversial topics, and alternative narratives from public discourse.

We collaborated with an accomplished group of international scholars and journalists to document this disturbing trend in Censorship, Digital Media and the Global Crackdown on Freedom of Expression (Peter Lang 2024). Our collective work analyzed contemporary and historical methods of censorship and anti-democratic impulses that threaten civil society, human rights, and freedoms of information and expression around the world today. The collection explains how a rising tide of political tyranny coupled with the expansion of corporate power is stifling dissent, online expression, news reporting, political debate, and academic freedom from the United States and Europe to the Global South.

Advertisement

The Assault on Press Freedom

Our volume reveals an epidemic of censorship and attacks on journalists and free speech around the globe. Although completed prior to the horrifying atrocities of October 7, 2023, in Israel, the text provides context for understanding that Israeli violence against Palestinians since October 7, including the murder of journalists, has been decades in the making. This strategy initially took hold with the assassination of the veteran Al Jazeera reporter Shireen Abu Akleh, a Palestinian-American, as she documented Israel’s occupation of Jenin. The world has now witnessed the full flowering of the Israeli-state aggression against Palestinians that led to her murder. To date, Israel has killed more than 100 media workers in Gaza, raising the concern and outrage of numerous press freedom organizations and seventy UN member states that have now called for international investigations into each one of the murders. As the International Federation of Journalists reported, “Killing journalists is a war crime that undermines the most basic human rights.”

Journalists around the globe are repeatedly targeted because their profession, which is protected constitutionally in many nations, exists to draw attention to abuses of power. Thus, it is no surprise that the rise in global censorship has entailed the targeting of journalists with violence, imprisonment, and harassment. In Russia, journalists are jailed and die in custody, as they do in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, China, and Hong Kong. In Mexico, there are “silenced zones,” controlled by a deadly collaboration between drug gangs and government corruption, where journalists are routinely killed. In 2022, Mexico was the most dangerous country for journalists outside of a war zone.

The assault on press freedom has also been normalized in self-proclaimed democracies such as the United Kingdom, where WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been imprisoned for more than five years, and in the United States, which has targeted Assange with espionage charges simply for promoting freedom of information. Although US presidents and other national figures often refer to the United States as “the leader of the free world,” the United States now ranks 55th in the world on the Reporters without Borders 2024 World Press Freedom Index.

Advertisement

Repression of Artists and Academics

News outlets and their workers are not the only targets of the current wave of repression. Hollywood has long been shaped—and censored—by government and corporate power. For example, our book includes a chapter on the Pentagon’s long-standing influence on Hollywood, which has resulted in the film industry abandoning production of hundreds of films deemed unacceptable by the military.

In addition to media, educators and academics are increasingly subject to repressive measures that muzzle freedom of information and expression. Scholars and institutions of higher education sometimes produce research that challenges the myths and propaganda perpetuated by those in power. And even when they don’t, autonomy from micromanagement by government authorities and private funders is a prerequisite for the integrity of scholarly research and teaching, which tends to make elites exceedingly nervous. This is why universities and academic freedom are increasingly under siege by autocratic regimes and right-wing activists from Hungary to Brazil and from India to Florida.

Alarmingly, the latest Academic Freedom Index found that more than 45 percent of the world’s population now lives in countries with an almost complete lack of academic freedom (more than at any time since the 1970s). In Brazil, the government of right-wing president Jair Bolsonaro attempted to ban education about gender and sexuality,  slashed budgets for the country’s universities, and threatened to defund the disciplines of philosophy and sociology. In 2018, Hungary’s conservative Fidesz government shut down graduate programs in gender studies, forced the country’s most prestigious university, the Central European University, to relocate to Austria, and sparked months of protests at the University of Theater and Film Arts in Budapest by making unpopular changes to the school’s board of trustees. Something similar happened in Turkey, where, since 2016, the ruling regime has suspended thousands of professors and administrators from their university posts for alleged ties to the outlawed Gülen movement and shut down upwards of 3,000 schools and universities. Meanwhile, in the United States, several Republican-controlled state legislatures have enacted draconian laws prohibiting or severely limiting teaching about race, sexuality, and gender in college classrooms. Under the influence of its arch-conservative governor, Ron DeSantis, Florida eliminated sociology as a core general education course at all of its public universities.

Advertisement

Big Tech Censorship

Censorship is nothing new, but the pervasive influence of the internet and the development of so-called artificial intelligence (AI) have created new, more nefarious opportunities to crack down on freedoms around the globe. So-called smart platforms and tools have created new forms of Big Tech control and content moderation, such as shadowbanning and algorithmic bias. Regimes have set up a form of quid pro quo with tech companies, demanding certain concessions such as removing unfavorable content in exchange for government access to otherwise private information about tech platforms’ users. For example, in the United States, tech companies depend on large government contracts and, as a result, often work with government officials directly and indirectly to censor content. Nor do they block only false or misleading content. Social media platforms have also been found to censor perfectly valid scientific speculation about the possible origin of COVID-19 and instances of obvious political satire.

These restrictive practices are at odds with Big Tech PR campaigns that trumpet the platforms’ capacity to empower users. Despite this hype, critical examination reveals that privately controlled platforms seldom function as spaces where genuine freedom of information and intellectual exchange flourish. In reality, Big Tech works with numerous national regimes to extend existing forms of control over citizens’ behaviors and expression into the digital realm. People are not ignorant of these abuses and have taken action to promote freedom across the globe. However, they have largely been met by more censorship. For example, as social media users took to TikTok to challenge US and Israeli messaging on Gaza, the US government took steps to ban the platform. Relatedly, Israel raided Al Jazeeras office in East Jerusalem, confiscated its equipment, shuttered its office, and closed down its website.

Our book also details the complex history and structures of censorship in Myanmar, Uganda, and the Philippines, and popular resistance to this oppression. To this catalog of examples, we can add India’s periodic internet shutdowns aimed at stifling protests by farmers, the blocking of websites in Egypt, and the right-wing strongman Jair Bolsonaro’s persecution of journalists in Brazil. Each of these cases is best understood as a direct result of a rise in faux populist, right-wing authoritarian politicians and political movements, whose popularity has been fostered by reactionary responses to decades of neo-liberal rule.

Advertisement

What Is to Be Done? 

Censorship is being driven not only by governments but also by an array of political and corporate actors across the ideological spectrum, from right-wing autocrats and MAGA activists to Big Tech oligarchs and self-professed liberals. Indeed, when it comes to censorship, a focus on any one country’s ideology, set of practices, or justifications for restricting expression risks missing the forest for the trees. The global community is best served when we collectively reject all attempts to suppress basic freedoms, regardless of where they emerge or how they are implemented.

To counter increasing restrictions on public discourse and the muzzling of activists, journalists, artists, and scholars, we need global agreements that protect press freedom, the right to protest, and accountability for attacks on journalists. Protection of freedom of expression and the press should be a central plank of US foreign policy. We need aggressive antitrust enforcement to break up giant media companies that today wield the power to unilaterally control what the public sees, hears, and reads. We also need to create awareness and public knowledge to help pass legislation, such as the PRESS Act, that will guarantee journalists’ right to protect their sources’ confidentiality and prevent authorities from collecting information about their activities from third parties like phone companies and internet service providers.

Moreover, widespread surveillance by social media platforms and search engines, supposedly necessary to improve efficiency and convenience, ought to be abandoned. All of us should have the right to control any non-newsworthy personal data that websites and apps have gathered about us and to ask that such data be deleted, a right that Californians will enjoy starting in 2026.

Advertisement

In addition, we should all support the efforts of organizations such as the American Association of University Professors, Article 19, and many others to fight back against encroachments on academic and intellectual freedom.

Supporters of free expression should also vigilantly oppose the ideologically motivated content moderation schemes Big Tech companies so often impose on their users.

Rather than trusting Big Tech to curate our news feeds, or putting faith in laws that would attempt to criminalize misinformation, we need greater investment in media literacy education, including education about the central importance of expressive rights and vigorous, open debate to a functioning democracy. The era of the internet and AI demonstrates the urgent need for education and fundamental knowledge in critical media literacy to ensure that everyone has the necessary skills to act as digital citizens, capable of understanding and evaluating the media we consume.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

How the EU can reset foreign policy for the western Balkans

Published

on

Steven Everts makes numerous important and laudable points on the need for the EU to seriously recalibrate both its capacities and posture in foreign policy (Opinion, September 12).

It’s worth adding that in a foreign policy area on the bloc’s very borders, the EU has led the west into a dead end of failure, in which official pronouncements have never been more at variance with the on-the-ground reality.

The western Balkans is the only region in which the US consistently defers to a democratic partner’s leadership — that of the EU.

Nowhere else does the west, if united, wield greater leverage or have a wider array of policy instruments. Yet for far too long, the EU has addressed the region almost solely through its enlargement process, neglecting its foreign policy commitments — including a deterrent force in Bosnia and Herzegovina mandated by the Dayton Peace Agreement and authorised under Chapter 7 by the UN Security Council.

Advertisement

This force remains well below the brigade-strength required to pose a credible deterrent to threats to the peace and territorial integrity. In addition, the EU states it will support local authorities, who have primary responsibility to maintain a secure environment — defying the reason the mandate exists to begin with: namely to thwart attempts by local authorities to upend the peace.

The desire to maintain the fiction that the Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue is still alive compels the EU into all sorts

of contortions which in effect reward Serbia, despite allegations of Serbian involvement in recent violence, and periodic (and ongoing) threats of invasion. By straying from its original declared purpose to achieve mutual recognition between Serbia and Kosovo, as well as serving as a shield for Serbia’s authoritarian president, Aleksandar Vučić, the dialogue serves as a diversion from genuine problem- solving.

Incoming EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has demonstrated leadership and vision for Europe and the wider west as Estonia’s prime minister, particularly with regard to the response to Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine.

Advertisement

One hopes she will undertake the overdue task of making the policies of the EU and the wider west more consistent with the values of democracy and human dignity we proclaim to hold dear. She can begin by leading the west to a restoration of credible deterrence in the Balkans, and start to counter the backsliding of democracy long visible there.

Kurt Bassuener
Co-Founder and Senior Associate, Democratization Policy Council, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

An Amazing Site With Rich History

Published

on

man

It’s early summer in Moldova, and the cherries are already ripe. Fellow journalist Marian Männi and I pick and pop them into our mouths as we follow our chosen tour guide up a hill. We are exploring Old Orhei, a famous Moldovan landmark and archaeological site. It consists of three villages: Trebujeni to the north, Butuceni to the west and Morovaia to the east. The area is built on a green field, and the Răut River runs through it.

Following the guide’s lead, we climb a hill to find one of many cave monasteries. This one is rather hidden, so most tourists miss it entirely. 

My guide showcases a cave monastery above the Răut River, where tourists rarely find their way. Author’s photo.

A picture from the inside of the cave looking out. Author’s photo.

Advertisement

The surrounding area is an unusual sight. The sloping bank of the Răut River emerges from a perfectly flat field, looking almost man-made. However, it is a natural reminder of how landscapes evolve. You can find perfect seashells on the limestone bank in a country with no coastline, much like on a sandy beach. Millions of years ago, the Răut River was part of the ancient Sarmatian Sea, just like the lands of today’s Moldova.

Scenic views of Old Orhei. One can barely see the river under the hill. Author’s photo.

My guide, Professor Sergiu Musteață, knows this site incredibly well. He is a renowned historian from Moldova and a professor at the Faculty of Philology and History at “Ion Creangă” State Pedagogical University. He has worked to educate locals about the history of Old Orhei and how to develop tourism businesses. He has also guided them in creating guesthouses and writing proposals for funding to build flushing toilets in their homes.

Old Orhei has been one of the main subjects of his research since 1996. “I know everyone in Orheiul Vechi [the Romanian version of the name]!” he laughs. He also knows all of the approximately 300 caves in the area and has personally researched many of them.

Advertisement

Professor Sergiu Musteață says that people working in Moldovan tourism need to understand that the basis of it is history and heritage. Author’s photo.

A scenic journey through unknown sites

Musteață leads us along a hidden path lined with cherry trees from an old student’s base. Researchers have been excavating this area for decades, as the unique landscape reveals layers of settlements dating back to prehistoric times.

“When we come here with students, we usually clean the neighborhood and cut the grass first,” Musteață says, pushing branches away from the path. If only tourists knew about this shortcut hidden in nature.

Professor Musteață peers through a rustic gate. Author’s photo.

Advertisement

“We have organized 20 years of summer camps for the locals during the excavations, including summer schools for local kids. Lots of students, both locals and internationals, participated!” he states emphatically.

Despite many efforts, only a few locals have made a name for themselves in the tourism sector. “I don’t know why. There is not so much interest. It should be the most prominent place among tourists,” Musteață comments.

Unlike other visitors, we walk past the Peștera cave monastery, the main tourist attraction of Old Orhei. The current underground tunnels date back to 1820. However, the caves in these limestone hills have existed since the 14th century. Orthodox monks found solitude and a place for spiritual retreat in this isolation.

“There is another cave monastery here. Locals know about it, but only a few tourists will visit it,” says Musteață. This is where we are heading.

Advertisement

We walk past the Peștera cave monastery and head off-road to find another lesser-known monastery. Author’s photo.

We walk on the bank, passing through the Church of Ascension of St. Mary. The view of the valley and fields is breathtaking. Turning left, the professor leads us onto an almost unrecognizable road downhill from the bank. Our slippers aren’t ideal footwear for this leg of the journey, but nevertheless, we climb down the limestone bank to a land of grazing cows.

Musteață guides us onto a new path, leading down the limestone bank. Author’s photo.

After walking, we climb again to another obscure cave monastery of Old Orhei, built above the Răut’s waters. There isn’t a single soul up here now, but historically, monks isolated themselves in this cave. As a result, the monastery is covered in signs of human habitation.

The church’s facade is engraved with Slavonian writing: “This church was built by the slave of Bosie, pircalab (Chief Magistrate) of Orhei, together with his wife and his children, to cherish God, to forgive his sins.”

Advertisement

The professor shows us around. We see where the monks would sleep and where they built their fireplace. All the caves are in remarkably good shape, with few signs of dripping rocks.

We view the monastery’s exterior, which has endured for centuries. Author’s photo.

This structure often goes unexplored by tourists. “It’s a bit too far and difficult to access. That’s why people don’t know much about it and wouldn’t end up here,” Musteață explains.

Musteață teaches us about the monastery. Author’s photo.

Advertisement

On the whole, Old Orhei is a fascinating, history site. And its antiquity is richer than one might expect.

Mankind has loved this region since ancient times

The surroundings have been populated since the Paleolithic era due to good location — the river protects Old Orhei from three sides. The land is suitable for agriculture and flowing water is nearby.

Archaeological findings suggest that the Getians built some fortresses and settlements in this region during the 4th to 3rd centuries BCE, taking advantage of the natural fortifications provided by the rocky outcroppings and riverbanks.

In the 14th century CE, Old Orhei became part of the medieval state of Moldova (Țara Moldovei) after the collapse of the Golden Horde, a Mongol-Tatar state that controlled this territory as well.

Advertisement

After the Tatar period in the 12th to 14th centuries, an Orthodox Christian community developed during medieval times. Political stability and the protective embrace of nature made Old Orhei an important center. Moldovan hero and ruler Stephen the Great, whose rule lasted from 1457 to 1504, appointed his uncle, Peter III Aaron, to rule there. The area was fortified with strong defensive walls and towers.

Life in Old Orhei slowly faded in the 17th century. The administration moved to neighboring New Orhei, and gradually, the monastic community began to disappear. The last monks are believed to have left Old Orhei at the beginning of the 19th century. By this time, many monastic communities in the region faced significant challenges due to political changes, invasions and pressures from the expanding Ottoman Empire. The decline in monastic life at Old Orhei was part of a broader trend affecting many religious sites in the region.

At the beginning of the 20th century, a new Virgin Mary Church was built atop the bank near a cave monastery to revitalize the area’s spiritual significance. It serves as a symbol of Old Orhei’s continued religious heritage, even after the original monastic community dispersed.

Though the region’s religiosity remains, Old Orhei’s authenticity, unfortunately, has recently declined.

Advertisement

The loss of authenticity in a historic land

Many historical sites in Old Orhei face the problem of random preservation efforts, which are not concerned with preserving the site’s authentic look.

In 2023, the road from Butuceni village in the Cultural-Natural Reserve was asphalted, which led to an investigation by the Ministry of Culture. It ruined the village’s authenticity but gave locals more logistical freedom.

Climbing on the bank, we notice a brand-new red-roofed dwelling that, from a logical viewpoint, should not have been built in the reserve. But there it is, like the newly constructed path to the Peștera cave monastery and the asphalted road in Butuceni village.

This modern tampering is one thing preventing Moldova from having its first United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Site.

Advertisement

“There is too much industrialization in a place where authenticity is worshiped,” Musteață laments. The Old Orhei Reserve has been on the UNESCO tentative list for years but is not moving forward any time soon. “I don’t think there is much hope at the moment,” Musteață admits honestly.

The situation saddens him. He and other researchers have worked for years to put this site on the world map as a part of humanity’s historical cradle, to no avail.

“The landscape and the density of settlements since prehistory is special. You can see the changes in this part of the world, moving from East to West. The Golden Horde, the Islamic period, Christians — there is a huge variety of artifacts describing how people lived in this area,” Musteață explains.

Life has moved on from this relic. The Orthodox Church still holds significant power in the small country of Moldova, but only traces of the glory the church once had in Old Orhei remain. In the 1940s, the Soviet Union started excavations in the region, which also disrupted the old sites; they built a new road through the Golden Horde citadel and cut it in half.

Advertisement

“A historic road should go around the citadel. It’s completely doable,” Musteață says.

The professor feels that many of Moldova’s stories remain untold, even that of such a landmark as Old Orhei. “It is frustrating. We need to tell our story!” Musteață suggests.

He thinks the country itself should put Orhei at the top of the list of tourist destinations in Moldova. After all, it’s the most important tourist site in the country. “It should be declared a state priority, a national strategy,” he says. “People working in this field in Moldova need to understand that the basis of tourism is history and heritage.”

That is another reason why Moldova’s Old Orhei is not on the UNESCO list. “Our country overall is underrepresented,” Musteață believes.

Advertisement

According to UNESCO, the organization is not in a position to comment on what is missing for Old Orhei to receive its World Heritage Site title. Moldova first proposed the area as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2008 but withdrew its nomination the following year.

In September 2015, Moldova submitted a new version of the nomination dossier as “Orheiul Vechi Archaeological Landscape,” a cultural site. Following the evaluation process and a recommendation by the International Council on Monuments and Sites, Moldova withdrew the nomination again.

Luckily, Moldova appears on the UNESCO list as part of a group of countries with the Struve Geodetic Arc, a chain of survey triangulations spanning ten countries and over 2,820 kilometers. This chain reaches from the world’s northernmost city — Hammerfest, Norway — to the Black Sea. The listed site includes 34 points across all ten countries, one of which is in Moldova. The country is eager to earn its very own World Heritage Site title, even if it isn’t Old Orhei.

[Lee Thompson-Kolar edited this piece.]

Advertisement

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

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

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