Mamdani’s Moment: Early Post-Election Thoughts
So, with the polls closed and the results in, Zohran Mamdani is officially the Mayor-elect of New York City! Whether you see that as cause for celebration or catastrophe likely depends on where you sit politically (I won’t pretend otherwise: having lived in the city for years and following its politics closely, I’m thrilled!).
But what’s hard to dispute is that this marks a genuinely significant moment in urban politics: a generational shift and a rejection of the centrist consensus that, with few exceptions, has governed cities for decades. For those challenging that consensus, it’s also the biggest and most demanding opportunity yet to prove that a more radical, progressive politics can not only inspire but also govern effectively.
Whether that will be the case remains to be seen. What’s certain, though, is that in the days and weeks ahead we’ll hear a rerun of the same arguments about why he cannot, will not, and/or should not succeed we have heard again and again during the campaign. Some of these are, without question, serious. Many others are not. In my view, they reveal less about the limits of Mamdani’s politics than about the limits of imagination – and, in some cases, frankly, the bad faith – of those who advance them.
Here’s a not-quite-exhaustive list of objections I’ve already grown tired of hearing during the campaign – and which, as some of the post-election coverage already makes clear, are now going to be recycled along with why I think each either somewhat misses the point and can be rebuked, or is outrageously off the mark.
“Socialism? New York Will Become Venezuela!”
No. Nor will it become Cuba — or the Soviet Union, for that matter — as the New York Post (not for the first time) insinuated after election day. The democratic socialism Mamdani champions operates squarely within liberal-democratic institutions and shares far more with Scandinavian welfare-state traditions than with Caracas, Havana, or Moscow — or, for that matter, with earlier chapters of New York’s own history, when mayors like Fiorello La Guardia pursued bold public investments in housing, infrastructure, and transit, alongside expansive social programs and the strengthening of workers’ rights and unions — whether his opponents care to acknowledge it or not.
True to form, Murdoch's New York Post announced Mamdani's victory by dressing up democratic socialism in Cold War drag.
2. “Nice Ideas, But How’s He Actually Paying for This?”
This, doubtlessly, is a serious concern. Yes, implementing Mamdani’s agenda – fare-free buses, universal childcare, and all the rest of it – will be hard, not least because so many influential figures, right up to the senior ranks of the Democratic Party, would like nothing more than to see him fail. But difficulty shouldn’t be confused with impossibility, just as a political problem – building support in a resistant legislature, confronting entrenched interests, etc. – should not be mistaken for an economic one (“the money isn’t there”). New York is a fantastically wealthy city, and Mamdani’s repeated point is that political possibility expands when people organise around it. That’s not magical thinking. History has shown, time and again, that this is how institutions change – even if decades of neoliberal governance have made it hard to imagine otherwise, and there are undoubtedly real fiscal and economic questions to work through.
3. “He’s Too Young and Lacks Experience.”
Age and competence aren’t the same thing – anyone pretending they are should take a look around, especially in politics– yet it is of course fair that some worry about Mamdani’s age – he’s thirty-four – and relative lack of (executive) experience. However, I’d argue this concern is offset somewhat by the fact that he just ran a damn good campaign: he organised neighbourhoods, built coalitions, mobilised constituencies, managed complex logistics – and beat opponents with far longer CVs. That may not be the same as governing New York City, of course. But it isn’t nothing either. More to the point, he seems fully aware that governing requires capable, qualified people: in a recent interview with Jon Stewart, he stressed precisely this – that bringing in good people is essential and he is committed to doing so.
And let’s be real: it is not despite his age but because of it – and the way it helped him connect with constituencies and issues others ignored – that he won and that we’re now talking about the possibility of a new progressive politics in New York! If he fails, we’ll know soon enough. But to assume failure in advance because of his youth or relative inexperience strikes me as a fundamental underestimation of the political talent that got him this far – and a little patronising on top of it.
4. “But He’s Muslim… and So On, and So Forth” [Pick Your Prejudice].
As in many New York campaigns before, this one got dirty, with Mamdani’s Muslim background “problematised” at times – sometimes subtly, sometimes less so. This one we can keep brief: if you oppose Mamdani’s policies – on housing, taxes, public safety, Israel, take your pick – fair enough. But if your objection focuses on his background or religion, you’re not engaging in politics, but – sorry, not sorry – in bigotry. Full stop.
5. “He’ll Compromise Away His Radicalism and Principles.”
And, finally, a worry often voiced on the left – and bound to resurface now – is this: “He’s genuine, but once in office the system will chew him up, and all we’ll get is a watered-down version of his platform.” It’s a fair worry. History is full of progressive hopefuls whose ambitious agendas were diluted, or worse, once they entered office. But compromise is not surrender. Without the ability to compromise, Mamdani wouldn’t have made it this far. Mayors can’t simply snap their fingers to implement commitments; compromise is unavoidable. The question isn’t whether he’ll compromise – he will – but how and/or where, and that will depend not just on him but on those who support him.
Progressive politics – no big news here – often falters because the left undermines itself. Anyone remotely interested in seeing Mamdani succeed should do their part to prevent that, give him space to find his footing, and remember that popular support and sustained grassroots mobilisation aren’t just what won him the election. They are also what will, in no small part, determine the success or failure of his mayoralty. There’s no way around it: the structures within which any mayor operates impose real limits, especially for progressives trying to push beyond the status quo. But an engaged public can expand the realm of the possible, strengthen their hands, and make it far more likely they will be able to deliver on the promises that brought them to power, while impatience, infighting, or preemptive skepticism would almost certainly do the opposite.
Where things go from here – whether Mamdani succeeds or not – is yet to be seen. What’s clear, though, is this: what happens in New York matters far beyond the city, because it will shape how millions elsewhere imagine what cities – and democracy itself – can be. Those wary of his politics or unconvinced by his platform will watch nervously; for those of us broadly (or enthusiastically!) supportive of what he stands for, it’s a moment to celebrate, even if, for all the hope his win has inspired, the real work only starts now.
