Tulsi Gabbard: The Ethical Obligations of WOC in Power
Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore
Over the past year, we’ve seen numerous women of color take center stage — making history and transforming our perception of what our politicians should look and act like. In November 2024, Kamala Harris, of Jamaican and Indian descent, was one of the most important figures in American politics — until everything came crashing down.
Now, in what feels like a major reversal of recent improvements, the Trump administration is threatening all the progress that has been made on racial equity over the last century. They have already begun to revise historical narratives by targeting museums and deleting information about African American icons. They have struck out against universities, and thus students, by framing DEI initiatives as exclusionary. They have emboldened white supremacists and Neo-Nazis through discriminatory language and policies. The stunning rise in hatred toward minorities that this administration is complicit in should not be taken lightly, and I refuse to ignore the role which prominent women of color continue to play in it.
Is it wrong to assign a subset of the population greater moral responsibility than everyone else? From some perspectives, maybe so. Still, as a woman of color myself, I wonder if we should indeed be held to a higher standard politically. After all, we cannot claim obliviousness where discrimination is concerned, and when the Trump administration seems to view us as mere diversity hires, it's fair to say that our role in society is being threatened by his actions as well. I’ve felt the impact of this rhetoric personally; it’s hard not to question what you’ve achieved when so many feel that you’ve had an unfair advantage. So if I choose to scrutinize the actions of women such as Tulsi Gabbard more than others might, it’s because of my own experiences in a world that is rapidly becoming more scrutinous of us.
Selling Out: Tulsi Gabbard
It’s important to note that Tulsi Gabbard, our Director of National Intelligence under President Trump, wasn’t always complacent in the shift toward conservatism. Though the memory of it may be hazy now, she was once a major name in the Democratic Party. As the first Hindu in Congress, Gabbard broke barriers, eventually leveraging her popularity to become the vice chair of the DNC. In 2016, she endorsed Bernie Sanders’ bid for president over the more moderate Hillary Clinton, and in 2020, she was a democratic presidential candidate herself. After losing the 2020 race, her politics made a sudden shift, as though she were embittered by the unwillingness of Democrats to embrace her candidacy. Two years later, Gabbard formally left the Democratic party, citing “anti-white racism” and “cowardly wokeness” as reasons for her exit. She also accused the Democrats of “racializing every issue” in her post announcing her departure from the party. Her post was consistent with common rightwing racial rhetoric, but coming from a marginalized individual, these remarks seem to hold greater significance.
Wokeness, a standout phrase choice by Gabbard, is an interesting concept. As many social scientists have identified, it amounts to nothing more than a dog whistle for racial dialogue, which is valuable to the right in that it buries its true meaning under a layer of ambiguity that reduces accountability. As journalist Michael Harriot pointed out, it’s much easier to demonize a word than a minority group, and the war on wokeness has succeeded in this demonization by substituting the word for the groups it aims to target.
For people of color to actively buy into this expression (the new meaning, not the original version which derives from AAVE) is to condone racist ideology by distancing the intent of policy from its reality. In Gabbard’s case, describing wokeness as cowardly and blaming the Democrats for sowing dissent helps to vilify earnest attempts to foster equity as somehow weak and counterintuitive. Suddenly, calling out discrimination becomes a sign of over-sensitivity, and feigning naivety toward bigotry is the norm. This shift in narrative makes being a bystander desirable and prevents individuals from advocating for one another out of fear of being perceived as “woke.” While it may have won Tulsi Gabbard points with the right to espouse negative ideas about wokeness, belittling those willing to stand up to prejudice only hinders racial progress.
In regards to her other accusations, the cognition behind “anti-white racism” is fascinating. Research done through Harvard Business School has found that many white people perceive racism as a zero-sum game, where decreased discrimination against minorities somehow increases discrimination against their own race. It is this mindset that creates a belief in the existence of anti-white racism, and causes some white people to even argue that they experience more discrimination than their Black counterparts. Of course, plenty of research suggests that this is far from the truth, but the mere fact that this ideology is being pushed by mainstream politicians, especially non-white ones, demonstrates how the narrative around racial justice can be twisted to frame those who are instigating discrimination as the victims.
Not the Exception: Usha Vance
In more ways than one, Tulsi Gabbard’s shift into conservatism was steeped in problematic rhetoric. However, she isn’t the only woman of color in the Trump administration whose behavior has been harmful to the community, and thus isn’t the only one worth highlighting. Another member of the Trump administration whose actions negatively affect her own community is Usha Vance. Vance, a highly educated lawyer with degrees from both Yale and Cambridge, made history as the first non-white Second Lady, but earning this distinction didn’t make her more willing to support minorities who are facing oppression under the second Trump administration. This can be seen by her silence regarding the actions of her husband, Vice President JD Vance.
JD Vance has a bad track record when it comes to racism, which is strange, given who he’s married to. In late 2024, he hand-waved racist jokes made by comedian Tony Hinchcliffe at a Trump rally, saying that Americans should “stop getting so offended.” Belittling marginalized people for being rightfully angry about a political candidate providing a platform for bigotry is hardly a good look, yet Usha Vance had nothing to say about his behavior. More recently, her husband urged DOGE to rehire a staffer who had posted “normalize Indian hate” on his Twitter account. Still, Usha remained silent, even when the bigotry being promoted was against her own community. There’s also plenty to be said about the way JD Vance bullied the Haitian community in his own state with racist slander accusing them of eating pets, all of which occurred without condemnation from the Second Lady.
Every time I hear something new about JD Vance, I wonder how anyone can remain silent while their significant other defends someone who has encouraged hate against their own community. Moreover, how can anyone be silent while their significant other perpetuates hate against immigrants, when they themselves come from an immigrant household? These are questions I don’t claim to have an answer to, and while I certainly don’t blame Usha more than her husband for his behavior, I do think that Usha Vance being a woman of color does make her silence more intolerable. The reality is that while she may not be openly scorning her fellow POC, she cannot be ignorant of the harm that her husband is effectuating on her own community. An ethical obligation to step in clearly exists here, whether we want to acknowledge it or not.
Seeing people like Tulsi Gabbard and Usha Vance stand by as the walls close in on marginalized communities makes me reflect on conversations I’ve had with my fellow WOC in the past about our current political climate. I’ve come to realize, through these discussions, that there’s a relatively easy explanation for why some choose to embrace right-wing ideology surrounding wokeness. The reality is that it is exhausting to be aware of how your identity negatively impacts your position in society, especially when it is an unchangeable aspect of your character. To deny that racism and sexism are constants in our existence is freeing in some regards, even though it is, ultimately, a fantasy. It helps you feel like you have more agency in a world that often tries to push you down.
However, while it can be good to feel liberated from discourse around your own marginalization, choosing to pretend it doesn’t exist only hinders societal progress. If we ignore these problems when they pop up in our own lives, we hurt those around us who may feel that we are denying their experiences. Similarly, on the grander political scale, the women of color in the Trump administration who are ignoring the prejudiced behavior of their peers and the discriminatory policies that are being enacted, even if done with positive intentions, are harming minorities by refusing to acknowledge them for what they are.
Don’t get me wrong — I’m not attempting to cast all the blame for what is happening in our country onto the women of color involved in this administration. It is undeniably difficult to stand up for what is right, especially in our modern political climate. Racial injustice is a uniquely challenging problem, and as studies have demonstrated, both people of color and white people alike show an inclination toward inaction when faced with prejudice, out of fears of retaliation and disapproval. For people of color who have reached high positions in government, the fear that everything could be lost by speaking out must be extremely strong. However, prominent women of color like Tulsi Gabbard and Usha Vance have a strong moral imperative to rebuke the xenophobic actions of their party members because of their prominence and their platform.
Being a bystander in a moment like this is unconscionable, especially when racial tensions seem to be on the rise, and if anyone has the ability to make change, it is necessary for them to do so. It may seem to them that being silent is better than open condemnation, but when those closest to them are vilifying members of their own community, there is no justification for being a bystander. In fact, staying silent only supports those seeking to sow hatred by suggesting that minorities are rubber-stamping regressive policies.
Everyone, at some point, faces a difficult choice that helps define who they are. For Tulsi Gabbard and the women of color in the Trump administration now, this may be it. Though it may be incredibly hard to defy those in power, I hope that they realize their ethical obligations and decide to promote kindness over bigotry. It’s critical that minorities in power choose to uplift their people rather than sit idly by while their oppression continues, because when marginalized individuals see their own leaders accepting the status quo, it hampers their ability to seek better prospects. Maybe a tone shift from these women is too optimistic to wish for, but I truly believe that, more than anyone, they are capable of it. We live in dark times, so our world needs people who can stand up against prejudice — and who better to do it than those who have experienced it themselves?