If Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid didn’t already exist, would you oppose them as fringe, radical ideas?
What made this country great was regulated capitalism with a leavening of socialist policies, high marginal tax rates for the rich, and a strong labor movement. That foundation has been eroded over the last 45 years. We need to rebuild it.
You are putting words in my mouth. I am not an advocate of socialism. I am also not a fan of unrestrained capitalism. I have seen the excesses of the former in the Soviet Union and the latter in modern-day Russia. A social safety net is a good thing. Some government regulation of business is necessary and important. Calling social security “socialism” is a rhetorical sleight of hand employed by partisans on both right and left. The left uses it to swindle people into accepting fringe ideas alongside common sense policies. The right uses it to get people to reject those common sense policies as fringe ideas.
> Calling social security “socialism” is a rhetorical sleight of hand
Social Security is a government program to reduce elder poverty. It does so by transferring wealth from workers to retirees. To me that seems like a socialist program.
Trashing Mamdani is trashing a person who stands for and applauds taking care of all the people of America. The disenfranchised, the poor and those who demand trumpism to fall/trump to be impeached/ trump to go to prison for his crimes
Literally nobody would design those programs today. The people who started those programs didn't even design them that way. The dependent to payer ratio was like 10,000 to 1 or something ridiculous that made them not care how it was structured.
Countries that came up with that stuff later in the demographic transition all made very difference choices of how to structure them.
They’re still perfectly viable, but they wouldn’t get done today due to fear-mongering.
Social Security has been around for 90 years. Al Gore proposed saving excess Social Security payments into the government in what he called a “lock box”, but instead Bush used the excess income to fund tax cuts. The future funding gap can still be addressed by removing the cap on income for paying into Social Security.
Ultimately, no social programs can survive successive Republican tax cuts. They’ve been bound and determined to kill Social Security for decades. That’s the root cause of Social Security’s shaky footing.
Vote out the Republicans, and all of the intractable problems suddenly become solvable.
Taxing the shit out of young people and transferring it to old people is morally wrong. Social Security has always had the problem that beneficiaries receive more than they pay in, it's just come to a head because we didn't make enough babies. It was always a Ponzi scheme.
Second, there is no "trust fund". The benefits are "pay as you go". If the "trust fund" buys treasuries we have no clue what those treasuries will be worth 30+ years down the line. There I no mechanism to automatically adjust benefits to match the value of the assets in the fund (yes, technically that's suppose to happen in eight years, but everyone knows politicians won't do it). Dramatic fiscal cliffs have a 0% track record of being implemented.
No party wants to cut benefits or raise taxes to pay for them.
Al Gore also falsely claimed he won the 2000 election. Do you think maybe Giuliani and Trump got that idea from Gore? Instead, do you believe Gore was right by Trump was wrong because Gore’s politics are much closer to yours?
NBC News has been tracking the relative incomes of Americans, divided in to five quintiles from top to bottom, since 1988. Until GW Bush, the gap between the highest and lowest quintile increased steadily. The gap decreased only during *GW Bush’s first term as president*. Bush’s second term was marred by several economic woes, but the problem of redlining poorer and heavily minority neighborhoods already existed under Clinton, so who else did little?
The last year of Clinton’s presidency we were in a recession. I knew people affected by it. It wasn’t as bad as the recession in the last year of GW Bush’s presidency, but it shows the Democrats aren’t the magical solution to all problems economic that you seem to pretend they are.
Neither major party sees it that way by when it happens on the other party’s watch. The news media pointed out that the first action happened in the middle of Clinton’s terms; the Republicans pointed it out strongly while the Democrats denied it strongly. (Never mind other actions, or lack thereof, that both administrations did or didn’t that helped bring on the Great Recession.)
Also, Obama touted and claimed credit for a great economic recovery from that recession. Several days before the 2016 election a _New York Times_ article on an industrial city on Lake Erie next to Pennsylvania pointed out that the “great” recovery hadn’t occurred there and in some other places. Couple that with the Democratic nominee being Hillary Clinton, with her and her inner circle assuming the Rust Belt would fall in line to vote Democratic again, and Trump having no political record. It’s not much of a surprise that Trump won.
I believe at least some recessions are preventable and that the government can respond more rapidly than it often has.
I highly respect you for all you've done for Chess, for the world, for fighting against Russia.
With that being said, I respectfully want to push back against this sentiment.
I believe that progressive caution, the fear of bold action, the acceptance of a status quo that is simply not working, is a bigger danger to democracy than a democratic party that is too "Woke."
I think we should give Mamdani a chance. I'm Jewish, my family escaped Eastern Europe under the dual threat of antisemitism from both the Fascists and the Communists. But I care about this country too, and am staying hopeful. The economic conditions under oligarchy are getting outrageous, and it's going to take a bold figure to try something new.
I don’t know if you’re in NYC, but I am. I had over a dozen interactions with Mamdani activists recently, half of them online. EACH one started out with their canned “he’s against all violence”. EACH one of them confirmed within 3 exchanges their full and unequivocal support for Hamas charter and goals.
Less than 0.7% of voters imposed their immature and hostile will on this city. It takes a LOT of effort to make Sliwa and Adams look palatable and reasonable and congrats, y’all succeeded
I can’t tell if this is sarcasm but I’ll presume it is since Mr. Mamdani is of unequivocally, purely “Aryan” race according to those who care about these things. NS love him in every way.
Bro relax. He’s a mayor of nyc, not a Middle East conflict expert. Must I argue with every maga know-nothing activist to make a general statement about you?
First of all he’s not a mayor yet; GOP strategists love him and top contributor to him is the famous “Organization unavailable for these records”.
And if your only answer to very real concerns of people that are already a target to 68% of all hate crimes is to accuse them of being “maga know-nothing” you’re literally no better then the potbellied inbred confederation flag bearers “for solidarity” . Every Mamdanist so far was very vocal about their commitment to disenfranchise everyone they don’t precisely align with, or about their acceptance of violence and terror of civilians here due to foreign issues. Nobody including Mamdani actually addressed concerns.
For Mar A Lago this is a pure win-win scenario. Either they get a new GOP mayor, or they get to wreck NYC.
While I don’t deny the valid concerns many Jews have in nyc and in the rest of the country. (Take a good look at why evangelicals/republicans love Israel so much-it ain’t the Jews it’s the end of days stuff to get Jesus to come back) M Gessen’s latest in the times addresses some of the concerns you mentioned. I think many of mamdani’s followers that you focus on could definitely be naive and wrong about some of the issues regarding Israel/palestine but overall this election was a referendum on survival and having a decent life in a city that many want to continue to call home.
I’ve lost Marsha’s narrative a couple years ago when she started toeing the “colonial liberal” party line. But I did find Gary Kasparov’s take very poignant.
I’m speaking as someone who survived a collapse of a superpower, a “civil” war and the entire bucket of pleasantries that is the western immigration bureaucracy. And a lifelong liberal that still has literal scars on literal body over political stuff:
People that have crystallized around Mamdani are like the worst caricature of rabid “radical leftist” from Rush Limbaugh’s. All of them except you and OP here, whose content I love and cherish, have descended right away into open slurs and calls to disenfranchise and attack all those not precisely aligned with them, aka “normal” people.
Pretty much all of them support Hamas goals in every way that matters. There is zero attention to any issues happening in the world, like the bombing in Damascus that took over a dozen lives; while singular obsession with Israel and rabid hate of everything their mind can tangentially relate to it is the default setting.
Reality of Jews being targets of 68% of all hate crimes is a source of funny gleeful comments and encouragement.
Frankly, I’d expect more subtlety from a Klan rally. So far this has been a festival of pure unabashed hate, mildly excused by a charismatic, young candidate with progress policies.
Can we ever find a progressive candidate that doesn’t excite every Nazi home and abroad in that way ?
“ Pretty much all of them support Hamas goals in every way that matters.” I don’t engage with them like that, they are not serious people. Pay close attention to those who seek to divide us. The anti Israel college protests at Columbia were largely organized and funded by terrorist alligned oligarchs in Qatar. You can look that up. There were plenty of reasonable voices who called for a hostage release/end to the war who were drowned out by the well funded hate operation. Mamdami promises to He also plans to increase funding for anti-hate crime initiatives by 800%, with particular attention to combating antisemitism. That’s better than fake friend to Jews cuomo. Give M Gessen a read. I don’t have to agree with everything a writer says to get into/enlightenment.
It is time for Americans to get real about the oligarchy problem that we are all about to face. We should all pay attention why the voters chose mamdani. New York City deserves to have a mayor that represents the interests of regular people, not self obsessed oligarchs.
I checked mamadani's election promises and when they inded are leftist - especially in America - they are quite reasonable and unlike GOP agenda, his program would increase social cohesion, reduce incentives for crime (better minimum salary, affordable housing), increase children well being (free childcare up to age 5), etc. People ride into election with this kind of agenda in such hellholes like Finland - where I'm writing this - and while I can attest our country is indeed quite far from perfect and we have our own troubles, our crime rates are quite low, no school shootings, less child poverty, universal health care (free for children up till age of 18) and free education up till master's level. In doctoral level you are paid to do your research.
We also are doing well in UN sponsored World happppiness report, which I believe is partly because of our social programs, quite similar to what Mamdani is advocating.
Now, I don't know how he is going to do in his new job and if society in very polarized US political climate is ready for such programs - they might fail simply because bureaucracy and/or society rejects them - I'd say give the guy a chance. I'd remind readers that while programs that are considered very leftis in USA, are effectively working in Finland as we speak and at the same time quite many GOP congressional members seem to like my country, including Trump himself. Haven't heard from them that Finland is a socialist nightmare, at least not yet.
Maybe the problem is not Mamadani, but domestic politics and optics projected by political bundits who have incentive to create controversy and anger theis audience? It's good for their business, after all.
Yes. Dems need to get back to the roots of fdr. Mamdani’s win only affirms that. My Jewish family emigrated here from the Soviet Union and definitely recoil when they hear “socialist or socialism”…the policies of fdr have nothing to do with the Soviet kind of socialism, the word is ick to many. Maybe we could just call people FDR-ists and call it a day.
The MAGA and Republican accusations of 'socialism' have absolutely nothing to do with socialism. They've been using that supposed slur for 40-100 years or so to justify why they don't want everyone to have equal rights....against slavery: socialism, pro-suffrage: socialism...etc.
The MAGA and Republican accusations of 'socialism' have absolutely nothing to do with socialism. They've been using that supposed slur for 40-100 years or so to justify why they don't want everyone to have equal rights....against slavery: socialism, pro-suffrage: socialism...etc. Only white men with property allowed. History tells the tale
The MAGA and Republican accusations of 'socialism' have absolutely nothing to do with socialism. They've been using that supposed slur for 40-100 years or so to justify why they don't want everyone to have equal rights....against slavery: socialism, pro-suffrage: socialism...etc. Only white men with property allowed. History tells the tale
Thanks for that comment. I think it’s really important. Sometimes labels point to the wrong direction depending on the experience of the receiver, and “Socialism” seems to be one of those labels. Really interesting comment. I’m ready to drop the “Democratic” party, not because of recent failures, but because of the baggage the label has to pro-Constitution conservatives, whom I disagree with but can live with.
The MAGA and Republican accusations of 'socialism' have absolutely nothing to do with socialism. They've been using that supposed slur for 40-100 years or so to justify why they don't want everyone to have equal rights....against slavery: socialism, pro-suffrage: socialism...etc. Only white men with property allowed. History tells the tale
The MAGA and Republican accusations of 'socialism' have absolutely nothing to do with socialism. They've been using that supposed slur for 40-100 years or so to justify why they don't want everyone to have equal rights....against slavery: socialism, pro-suffrage: socialism...etc. Only white men with property allowed. History tells the tale
The MAGA and Republican accusations of 'socialism' have absolutely nothing to do with socialism. They've been using that supposed slur for 40-100 years or so to justify why they don't want everyone to have equal rights....against slavery: socialism, pro-suffrage: socialism...etc. Only white men with property allowed. History tells the tale
I think bigger problem for the Democratic Party establishment is that they don’t have enough authentic leaders. Which is true of the former Republican Party establishment which is why Trump destroyed them.
But while my own policy preferences are more moderate, I don’t see why a charismatic and authentic democratic populist couldn’t win the 2028 Presidential election? Hard to say what the political environment will be at that time, but none of the Trump successors seem like compelling candidates now.
First of all, I think Democrats were right to not impeach Trump in the latest attempt related to Iran. There were other impeachable offenses in the first term and such misdeeds are a safe bet in the second. This was not one of them. So we can move on from that point.
As for the “revolution in the air”—I hesitate to treat Mamdani’s primary victory as so determinative. Republicans will certainly latch onto the New York leftist sensation to tar other Democrats with his politics. And it is a cute narrative for elite media.
But if we are assessing this objectively, we need to take a more holistic view of Democratic politics and the circumstances of Mamdani’s victory.
Starting off, the 33 year-old Mamdani beat a historically bad opponent at a time when Democratic voters are understandably frustrated with the party establishment. Cuomo embodied that establishment—plus baggage. He didn’t even run a visible campaign to try and make up for it. There certainly exists a core of Mamdani voters who believe in his message wholeheartedly, but there is likely also a sizable contingent that simply rejected Cuomo.
Also, why is it only a trend if it’s a DSA leftist who wins? Why shouldn’t Democrats follow the example of a pragmatic liberal like Mikie Sherril, who beat challengers to her left in the New Jersey gubernatorial primary? When the far-left wins, they are keen to spin it as conclusive evidence that theirs is the only way. When they lose, they’re suspiciously quiet—or they start to point fingers. The bigger picture is more complicated than “revolution in the air.”
As a left-of-center, moderate, 40-something entrepreneur from The Netherlands, your post let me to have a look at the policy proposals of Mamdani. To my surprise, there was little I disagreed with. Quite a middle-of-the-road guy as far as I’m concerned.
Dems need someone who, like Mamdani, is telegenic, sincere, and good at messaging—but with policy ideas grounded in fact and logic. Will Shumer step back from leadership or stick it out like Biden, to everyone's detriment? And where is Obama?
Obama is in the background trying to sabotage exactly the sorts of candidates that voters gravitate towards. He deliberately undercut Sanders in the 2020 election and gave us the disastrous Biden presidency that led into Kamala Harris's defeat.
In the meantime, Republicans are going to stamp Mamdani's name on the forehead of every Democrat and hold the Democratic Party responsible for all the bad consequences of Mamdani's policies in New York City. He's an albatross around the neck of the nation.
Amazingly, Chuck Schumer has just today posted on X about Mamdani, seemingly endorsing him. And so has Bill Clinton: "I'm wishing you much success in November and beyond as you work to bring New Yorkers together to tackle the city's challenges and shape a stronger, fairer future." What folly!
In 2016, Bernie Sanders won where Trump won. They appealed to the same locations and their supporters may even overlap on the Zenn diagram. If Republicans continue to be Trumpist, it might be that a "Socialist" Democratic opponent is the strategic choice. Do numbers say otherwise or are numbers lying?
Might get those who chose to stay home last November to the polls. I thought we were for helping everyone, treating ALL Americans as equal. We’ve never gotten anywhere in this country without what many viewed as “radical” changes.
Nobody wants to be the Soviet Union. Even the original idea of the Soviet Union post-revolution. We want what we had in the 1950s - jobs that supported living, infrastructure investment, a working progressive tax code with higher taxes on higher brackets of earnings - but without the racism and sexism. What we have now is exactly opposite of that. People have been yelling "socialist" since the Civil War. "Giving Black people freedom is Socialist!" And I don't see Mamdani as anti-Zionist. If Israel wasn't run by a fascist government, and had enacted and still upheld the Oslo Accords, they would be just another ally.
People thought Teddy & FDR were extremist also along with so many others that history has proved were actually quite moderate in comparison to how far the pendulum had swung to the opposite ie taking everything & anything away including people's human & civil rights. Imo in comparison why not go for it, shoot for the stars & see what you can shake up & out. If he can get or do only some of it I mean seriously most Americans are not so stupid to think that any politician should or can get whatever they want than that's good imo. That would be kinda sorta be like a dictatorship. Some might even argue that as you mentioned even both parties rnc/dnc seem or appear to have these qualities to them/in them these days also. Same thing same thing, we the people unsatisfied & not really being heard or represented due to corporate capture, $ dark & other or other things while they certain few get away with things & are unaccountable to such bad behaviors of which none of us ever would be. The reason so many fell for djt. He as Hitler & others did/do took advantage of that do nothing malize so some were easy prey or the ones who profit off of it cheered it on. He did/does nothing unless it profits himself or those pulling his strings. Proof is in the history past & present to prove this. We the people are numb to all the corruption & broken promises and recycling of the same inertia. There are certain times in history where the antidote to all that is in fact bold good change especially economically. We really all do better when we all do better. If you want to touch we the people's nerves I'd rather have it be done in a hopeful good way than the other & what's in office & admin now.
Mr Stone, social welfare programs are Not socialism. Continuing to conflate these two things, voters will vote themselves right into abject poverty and loss of their property. Dem Party must start accepting constructive criticism or good riddance.
What the leftists who are thrilling to this Marxist dont seem to understand is that New York is about to run out of other people's money (h/t Margaret Thatcher) the major part of the tax base is simply going to leave including the Financial industry. Once gone Wall Street will never return nor will its tax payments that make all the fun in fun city possible. New York faces genuine ruin.
Wow. What a brilliant response. Garbage people. Listen moron. The people who pay the taxes are going to LEAVE. Then their money won't be be available to tax. Did you get past 6th grade?
Yep, I got past sixth grade. They even gave me a National Merit Award in secondary school, and then I got all A’s in college, and then I even *taught* public secondary school for the past decade.
Anyone who leaves will have their void filled by someone else. I can’t believe you didn’t logic that on your own. Nobody needs the oligarchy to exist. jfc
Stop with the division, bro. Other people’s money? The working class pay more taxes than anyone else. The major part of the tax base should leave to one of their other 9 homes if they feel so inclined. Make room for people who want a good life for their families.
That's what they threaten every time someone tries to raise their taxes, but they managed well enough under the 70% marginal tax rates we used to have.
Tired of the use and misuse of the terms “radical left” “leftist” and “socialist” which are just terms used to slur people who want a fair and just government that does not pander to racist, elitist, unregulated capitalistic and oligarchic policies of conservative and right wing politics.
Soviet socialism is not the same as the socialism of the US or of Scandinavia.
Russia is now neither communist nor socialist, but much like the US - a capitalist dictatorship in the guise of democracy.
If Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid didn’t already exist, would you oppose them as fringe, radical ideas?
What made this country great was regulated capitalism with a leavening of socialist policies, high marginal tax rates for the rich, and a strong labor movement. That foundation has been eroded over the last 45 years. We need to rebuild it.
You are putting words in my mouth. I am not an advocate of socialism. I am also not a fan of unrestrained capitalism. I have seen the excesses of the former in the Soviet Union and the latter in modern-day Russia. A social safety net is a good thing. Some government regulation of business is necessary and important. Calling social security “socialism” is a rhetorical sleight of hand employed by partisans on both right and left. The left uses it to swindle people into accepting fringe ideas alongside common sense policies. The right uses it to get people to reject those common sense policies as fringe ideas.
https://www.thenextmove.org/p/the-mamdani-mirage
> A social safety net is a good thing. Some government regulation of business is necessary and important
Thank you for saying that.
> Calling social security “socialism” is a rhetorical sleight of hand
Social Security is a government program to reduce elder poverty. It does so by transferring wealth from workers to retirees. To me that seems like a socialist program.
YES!
Trashing Mamdani is trashing a person who stands for and applauds taking care of all the people of America. The disenfranchised, the poor and those who demand trumpism to fall/trump to be impeached/ trump to go to prison for his crimes
Literally nobody would design those programs today. The people who started those programs didn't even design them that way. The dependent to payer ratio was like 10,000 to 1 or something ridiculous that made them not care how it was structured.
Countries that came up with that stuff later in the demographic transition all made very difference choices of how to structure them.
They’re still perfectly viable, but they wouldn’t get done today due to fear-mongering.
Social Security has been around for 90 years. Al Gore proposed saving excess Social Security payments into the government in what he called a “lock box”, but instead Bush used the excess income to fund tax cuts. The future funding gap can still be addressed by removing the cap on income for paying into Social Security.
Ultimately, no social programs can survive successive Republican tax cuts. They’ve been bound and determined to kill Social Security for decades. That’s the root cause of Social Security’s shaky footing.
Vote out the Republicans, and all of the intractable problems suddenly become solvable.
Taxing the shit out of young people and transferring it to old people is morally wrong. Social Security has always had the problem that beneficiaries receive more than they pay in, it's just come to a head because we didn't make enough babies. It was always a Ponzi scheme.
Second, there is no "trust fund". The benefits are "pay as you go". If the "trust fund" buys treasuries we have no clue what those treasuries will be worth 30+ years down the line. There I no mechanism to automatically adjust benefits to match the value of the assets in the fund (yes, technically that's suppose to happen in eight years, but everyone knows politicians won't do it). Dramatic fiscal cliffs have a 0% track record of being implemented.
No party wants to cut benefits or raise taxes to pay for them.
Al Gore also falsely claimed he won the 2000 election. Do you think maybe Giuliani and Trump got that idea from Gore? Instead, do you believe Gore was right by Trump was wrong because Gore’s politics are much closer to yours?
NBC News has been tracking the relative incomes of Americans, divided in to five quintiles from top to bottom, since 1988. Until GW Bush, the gap between the highest and lowest quintile increased steadily. The gap decreased only during *GW Bush’s first term as president*. Bush’s second term was marred by several economic woes, but the problem of redlining poorer and heavily minority neighborhoods already existed under Clinton, so who else did little?
The last year of Clinton’s presidency we were in a recession. I knew people affected by it. It wasn’t as bad as the recession in the last year of GW Bush’s presidency, but it shows the Democrats aren’t the magical solution to all problems economic that you seem to pretend they are.
It’s probably not possible to prevent recessions.
Neither major party sees it that way by when it happens on the other party’s watch. The news media pointed out that the first action happened in the middle of Clinton’s terms; the Republicans pointed it out strongly while the Democrats denied it strongly. (Never mind other actions, or lack thereof, that both administrations did or didn’t that helped bring on the Great Recession.)
Also, Obama touted and claimed credit for a great economic recovery from that recession. Several days before the 2016 election a _New York Times_ article on an industrial city on Lake Erie next to Pennsylvania pointed out that the “great” recovery hadn’t occurred there and in some other places. Couple that with the Democratic nominee being Hillary Clinton, with her and her inner circle assuming the Rust Belt would fall in line to vote Democratic again, and Trump having no political record. It’s not much of a surprise that Trump won.
I believe at least some recessions are preventable and that the government can respond more rapidly than it often has.
It has worked for 90 years. Hard to shore it up if Republicans keep cutting taxes.
Hello Mr. Kasparov,
I highly respect you for all you've done for Chess, for the world, for fighting against Russia.
With that being said, I respectfully want to push back against this sentiment.
I believe that progressive caution, the fear of bold action, the acceptance of a status quo that is simply not working, is a bigger danger to democracy than a democratic party that is too "Woke."
I think we should give Mamdani a chance. I'm Jewish, my family escaped Eastern Europe under the dual threat of antisemitism from both the Fascists and the Communists. But I care about this country too, and am staying hopeful. The economic conditions under oligarchy are getting outrageous, and it's going to take a bold figure to try something new.
I don’t know if you’re in NYC, but I am. I had over a dozen interactions with Mamdani activists recently, half of them online. EACH one started out with their canned “he’s against all violence”. EACH one of them confirmed within 3 exchanges their full and unequivocal support for Hamas charter and goals.
Less than 0.7% of voters imposed their immature and hostile will on this city. It takes a LOT of effort to make Sliwa and Adams look palatable and reasonable and congrats, y’all succeeded
what a racist comment from you.
I can’t tell if this is sarcasm but I’ll presume it is since Mr. Mamdani is of unequivocally, purely “Aryan” race according to those who care about these things. NS love him in every way.
Nah, this is where you lose me.
If you think that your article of faith has anything to do with anything here in NYC you’re just confirming the rest of Nazi sympathies.
Bro relax. He’s a mayor of nyc, not a Middle East conflict expert. Must I argue with every maga know-nothing activist to make a general statement about you?
First of all he’s not a mayor yet; GOP strategists love him and top contributor to him is the famous “Organization unavailable for these records”.
And if your only answer to very real concerns of people that are already a target to 68% of all hate crimes is to accuse them of being “maga know-nothing” you’re literally no better then the potbellied inbred confederation flag bearers “for solidarity” . Every Mamdanist so far was very vocal about their commitment to disenfranchise everyone they don’t precisely align with, or about their acceptance of violence and terror of civilians here due to foreign issues. Nobody including Mamdani actually addressed concerns.
For Mar A Lago this is a pure win-win scenario. Either they get a new GOP mayor, or they get to wreck NYC.
While I don’t deny the valid concerns many Jews have in nyc and in the rest of the country. (Take a good look at why evangelicals/republicans love Israel so much-it ain’t the Jews it’s the end of days stuff to get Jesus to come back) M Gessen’s latest in the times addresses some of the concerns you mentioned. I think many of mamdani’s followers that you focus on could definitely be naive and wrong about some of the issues regarding Israel/palestine but overall this election was a referendum on survival and having a decent life in a city that many want to continue to call home.
I’ve lost Marsha’s narrative a couple years ago when she started toeing the “colonial liberal” party line. But I did find Gary Kasparov’s take very poignant.
https://substack.com/@garrykasparov/note/c-129215931
I’m speaking as someone who survived a collapse of a superpower, a “civil” war and the entire bucket of pleasantries that is the western immigration bureaucracy. And a lifelong liberal that still has literal scars on literal body over political stuff:
People that have crystallized around Mamdani are like the worst caricature of rabid “radical leftist” from Rush Limbaugh’s. All of them except you and OP here, whose content I love and cherish, have descended right away into open slurs and calls to disenfranchise and attack all those not precisely aligned with them, aka “normal” people.
Pretty much all of them support Hamas goals in every way that matters. There is zero attention to any issues happening in the world, like the bombing in Damascus that took over a dozen lives; while singular obsession with Israel and rabid hate of everything their mind can tangentially relate to it is the default setting.
Reality of Jews being targets of 68% of all hate crimes is a source of funny gleeful comments and encouragement.
Frankly, I’d expect more subtlety from a Klan rally. So far this has been a festival of pure unabashed hate, mildly excused by a charismatic, young candidate with progress policies.
Can we ever find a progressive candidate that doesn’t excite every Nazi home and abroad in that way ?
“ Pretty much all of them support Hamas goals in every way that matters.” I don’t engage with them like that, they are not serious people. Pay close attention to those who seek to divide us. The anti Israel college protests at Columbia were largely organized and funded by terrorist alligned oligarchs in Qatar. You can look that up. There were plenty of reasonable voices who called for a hostage release/end to the war who were drowned out by the well funded hate operation. Mamdami promises to He also plans to increase funding for anti-hate crime initiatives by 800%, with particular attention to combating antisemitism. That’s better than fake friend to Jews cuomo. Give M Gessen a read. I don’t have to agree with everything a writer says to get into/enlightenment.
It is time for Americans to get real about the oligarchy problem that we are all about to face. We should all pay attention why the voters chose mamdani. New York City deserves to have a mayor that represents the interests of regular people, not self obsessed oligarchs.
I don’t live in New York but only wish I did so I could vote for Mamdani
I checked mamadani's election promises and when they inded are leftist - especially in America - they are quite reasonable and unlike GOP agenda, his program would increase social cohesion, reduce incentives for crime (better minimum salary, affordable housing), increase children well being (free childcare up to age 5), etc. People ride into election with this kind of agenda in such hellholes like Finland - where I'm writing this - and while I can attest our country is indeed quite far from perfect and we have our own troubles, our crime rates are quite low, no school shootings, less child poverty, universal health care (free for children up till age of 18) and free education up till master's level. In doctoral level you are paid to do your research.
We also are doing well in UN sponsored World happppiness report, which I believe is partly because of our social programs, quite similar to what Mamdani is advocating.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cr72xep44kdo
Now, I don't know how he is going to do in his new job and if society in very polarized US political climate is ready for such programs - they might fail simply because bureaucracy and/or society rejects them - I'd say give the guy a chance. I'd remind readers that while programs that are considered very leftis in USA, are effectively working in Finland as we speak and at the same time quite many GOP congressional members seem to like my country, including Trump himself. Haven't heard from them that Finland is a socialist nightmare, at least not yet.
Maybe the problem is not Mamadani, but domestic politics and optics projected by political bundits who have incentive to create controversy and anger theis audience? It's good for their business, after all.
Politics isn’t chess—because unlike chess, the board, rules, and pieces keep shifting.
When people who lived under Soviet rule hear “socialism,” they recoil—not from theory, but from authoritarianism that failed to adapt.
Calling New York Democrats naïve ignores that they chose someone authentic who resonated with their needs and earned their trust.
Yes. Dems need to get back to the roots of fdr. Mamdani’s win only affirms that. My Jewish family emigrated here from the Soviet Union and definitely recoil when they hear “socialist or socialism”…the policies of fdr have nothing to do with the Soviet kind of socialism, the word is ick to many. Maybe we could just call people FDR-ists and call it a day.
The MAGA and Republican accusations of 'socialism' have absolutely nothing to do with socialism. They've been using that supposed slur for 40-100 years or so to justify why they don't want everyone to have equal rights....against slavery: socialism, pro-suffrage: socialism...etc.
'
The MAGA and Republican accusations of 'socialism' have absolutely nothing to do with socialism. They've been using that supposed slur for 40-100 years or so to justify why they don't want everyone to have equal rights....against slavery: socialism, pro-suffrage: socialism...etc. Only white men with property allowed. History tells the tale
The MAGA and Republican accusations of 'socialism' have absolutely nothing to do with socialism. They've been using that supposed slur for 40-100 years or so to justify why they don't want everyone to have equal rights....against slavery: socialism, pro-suffrage: socialism...etc. Only white men with property allowed. History tells the tale
Thanks for that comment. I think it’s really important. Sometimes labels point to the wrong direction depending on the experience of the receiver, and “Socialism” seems to be one of those labels. Really interesting comment. I’m ready to drop the “Democratic” party, not because of recent failures, but because of the baggage the label has to pro-Constitution conservatives, whom I disagree with but can live with.
I like that idea
The MAGA and Republican accusations of 'socialism' have absolutely nothing to do with socialism. They've been using that supposed slur for 40-100 years or so to justify why they don't want everyone to have equal rights....against slavery: socialism, pro-suffrage: socialism...etc. Only white men with property allowed. History tells the tale
The MAGA and Republican accusations of 'socialism' have absolutely nothing to do with socialism. They've been using that supposed slur for 40-100 years or so to justify why they don't want everyone to have equal rights....against slavery: socialism, pro-suffrage: socialism...etc. Only white men with property allowed. History tells the tale
The MAGA and Republican accusations of 'socialism' have absolutely nothing to do with socialism. They've been using that supposed slur for 40-100 years or so to justify why they don't want everyone to have equal rights....against slavery: socialism, pro-suffrage: socialism...etc. Only white men with property allowed. History tells the tale
I’m so annoyed with your ignorant post that I’m blocking you.
I think bigger problem for the Democratic Party establishment is that they don’t have enough authentic leaders. Which is true of the former Republican Party establishment which is why Trump destroyed them.
But while my own policy preferences are more moderate, I don’t see why a charismatic and authentic democratic populist couldn’t win the 2028 Presidential election? Hard to say what the political environment will be at that time, but none of the Trump successors seem like compelling candidates now.
Ex A: Barack Obama?
🤣
I love Barack Obama. And I wouldn’t consider him a populist.
Michelle Obama though…
Despite how much I value Mr. Kasparov’s perspectives - I do not fully agree with his comments here.
I’m proud to be a Socialist.
And I’m proud to have just voted for one.
Read the room. There’s something in the air. It’s called revolution and brought on by moderate Democrats that just refused to impeach a Nazi. Again.
First of all, I think Democrats were right to not impeach Trump in the latest attempt related to Iran. There were other impeachable offenses in the first term and such misdeeds are a safe bet in the second. This was not one of them. So we can move on from that point.
As for the “revolution in the air”—I hesitate to treat Mamdani’s primary victory as so determinative. Republicans will certainly latch onto the New York leftist sensation to tar other Democrats with his politics. And it is a cute narrative for elite media.
But if we are assessing this objectively, we need to take a more holistic view of Democratic politics and the circumstances of Mamdani’s victory.
Starting off, the 33 year-old Mamdani beat a historically bad opponent at a time when Democratic voters are understandably frustrated with the party establishment. Cuomo embodied that establishment—plus baggage. He didn’t even run a visible campaign to try and make up for it. There certainly exists a core of Mamdani voters who believe in his message wholeheartedly, but there is likely also a sizable contingent that simply rejected Cuomo.
Also, why is it only a trend if it’s a DSA leftist who wins? Why shouldn’t Democrats follow the example of a pragmatic liberal like Mikie Sherril, who beat challengers to her left in the New Jersey gubernatorial primary? When the far-left wins, they are keen to spin it as conclusive evidence that theirs is the only way. When they lose, they’re suspiciously quiet—or they start to point fingers. The bigger picture is more complicated than “revolution in the air.”
https://www.thenextmove.org/p/the-mamdani-mirage
As a left-of-center, moderate, 40-something entrepreneur from The Netherlands, your post let me to have a look at the policy proposals of Mamdani. To my surprise, there was little I disagreed with. Quite a middle-of-the-road guy as far as I’m concerned.
Dems need someone who, like Mamdani, is telegenic, sincere, and good at messaging—but with policy ideas grounded in fact and logic. Will Shumer step back from leadership or stick it out like Biden, to everyone's detriment? And where is Obama?
Obama is in the background trying to sabotage exactly the sorts of candidates that voters gravitate towards. He deliberately undercut Sanders in the 2020 election and gave us the disastrous Biden presidency that led into Kamala Harris's defeat.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/09/barack-obama-joe-biden-2020-campaign-178115
In the meantime, Republicans are going to stamp Mamdani's name on the forehead of every Democrat and hold the Democratic Party responsible for all the bad consequences of Mamdani's policies in New York City. He's an albatross around the neck of the nation.
Amazingly, Chuck Schumer has just today posted on X about Mamdani, seemingly endorsing him. And so has Bill Clinton: "I'm wishing you much success in November and beyond as you work to bring New Yorkers together to tackle the city's challenges and shape a stronger, fairer future." What folly!
In 2016, Bernie Sanders won where Trump won. They appealed to the same locations and their supporters may even overlap on the Zenn diagram. If Republicans continue to be Trumpist, it might be that a "Socialist" Democratic opponent is the strategic choice. Do numbers say otherwise or are numbers lying?
Might get those who chose to stay home last November to the polls. I thought we were for helping everyone, treating ALL Americans as equal. We’ve never gotten anywhere in this country without what many viewed as “radical” changes.
Nobody wants to be the Soviet Union. Even the original idea of the Soviet Union post-revolution. We want what we had in the 1950s - jobs that supported living, infrastructure investment, a working progressive tax code with higher taxes on higher brackets of earnings - but without the racism and sexism. What we have now is exactly opposite of that. People have been yelling "socialist" since the Civil War. "Giving Black people freedom is Socialist!" And I don't see Mamdani as anti-Zionist. If Israel wasn't run by a fascist government, and had enacted and still upheld the Oslo Accords, they would be just another ally.
People thought Teddy & FDR were extremist also along with so many others that history has proved were actually quite moderate in comparison to how far the pendulum had swung to the opposite ie taking everything & anything away including people's human & civil rights. Imo in comparison why not go for it, shoot for the stars & see what you can shake up & out. If he can get or do only some of it I mean seriously most Americans are not so stupid to think that any politician should or can get whatever they want than that's good imo. That would be kinda sorta be like a dictatorship. Some might even argue that as you mentioned even both parties rnc/dnc seem or appear to have these qualities to them/in them these days also. Same thing same thing, we the people unsatisfied & not really being heard or represented due to corporate capture, $ dark & other or other things while they certain few get away with things & are unaccountable to such bad behaviors of which none of us ever would be. The reason so many fell for djt. He as Hitler & others did/do took advantage of that do nothing malize so some were easy prey or the ones who profit off of it cheered it on. He did/does nothing unless it profits himself or those pulling his strings. Proof is in the history past & present to prove this. We the people are numb to all the corruption & broken promises and recycling of the same inertia. There are certain times in history where the antidote to all that is in fact bold good change especially economically. We really all do better when we all do better. If you want to touch we the people's nerves I'd rather have it be done in a hopeful good way than the other & what's in office & admin now.
Mr Stone, social welfare programs are Not socialism. Continuing to conflate these two things, voters will vote themselves right into abject poverty and loss of their property. Dem Party must start accepting constructive criticism or good riddance.
What the leftists who are thrilling to this Marxist dont seem to understand is that New York is about to run out of other people's money (h/t Margaret Thatcher) the major part of the tax base is simply going to leave including the Financial industry. Once gone Wall Street will never return nor will its tax payments that make all the fun in fun city possible. New York faces genuine ruin.
Only the most garbage-character people insinuate that more leftward policies will cause “money to run out.”
To where does it disappear? Are you implying that the poor people end up with it? Nonsense. That is purely a garbage-character thing to type.
Wow. What a brilliant response. Garbage people. Listen moron. The people who pay the taxes are going to LEAVE. Then their money won't be be available to tax. Did you get past 6th grade?
Yep, I got past sixth grade. They even gave me a National Merit Award in secondary school, and then I got all A’s in college, and then I even *taught* public secondary school for the past decade.
Anyone who leaves will have their void filled by someone else. I can’t believe you didn’t logic that on your own. Nobody needs the oligarchy to exist. jfc
You are too stupid to continue to have a conversation. Bye
Name the top three works of literature you’ve ever read, stablegenius. I’d like to judge the depth of this person claiming I’m “too stupid.”
I’m highly educated. Eat it, Doug.
Stop with the division, bro. Other people’s money? The working class pay more taxes than anyone else. The major part of the tax base should leave to one of their other 9 homes if they feel so inclined. Make room for people who want a good life for their families.
Ah your AI. Makes sense. Only a bot would write something this stupid and fake. The top ten percent pays 2/3 of the taxes in NYC.
Go see a therapist. You’re not well
Get lost troll.
That's what they threaten every time someone tries to raise their taxes, but they managed well enough under the 70% marginal tax rates we used to have.
Tired of the use and misuse of the terms “radical left” “leftist” and “socialist” which are just terms used to slur people who want a fair and just government that does not pander to racist, elitist, unregulated capitalistic and oligarchic policies of conservative and right wing politics.
Soviet socialism is not the same as the socialism of the US or of Scandinavia.
Russia is now neither communist nor socialist, but much like the US - a capitalist dictatorship in the guise of democracy.