In just a few months, Mamdani, a 34-year-old state assemblyman and Democratic Socialist, has gone from a long-shot fringe candidate to a national figure — securing an upset win in the June primary, where voters 18-29 had the highest turnout of any age group.
Now, on the cusp of Election Day — where polls show him the clear frontrunner over his closest rival, former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo — Mamdani is counting on that youth coalition to show up again. But his pledge to address rising costs appears to be resonating with young people far outside of the five boroughs. It’s a message that many Gen Z and millennials say speaks to their most pressing concerns at a time when many feel hopeless about their leaders and yearn for new voices willing to break with political norms.
“When a candidate is able to speak to the concerns of the populace and validate those concerns … I think that that has a big impact, especially when it comes to young people,” said Ruby Belle Booth, who studies young voters for the nonpartisan research organization CIRCLE.
I’m an old dude, and it isn’t just young people who feel hopeless about our elected representaives, and want new, dynamic leadership. I may not have as long a future as they do, but I’d like what time I have left to not be terrifying.
I’m a young dude and biased I may be, I believe socialism is the ideological result of a capitalist society. It’s not a competition the way I see it. It’s as natural an evolution as how containerization arose from the era of virtual machines. Change is slow, but we’re having 5% more debate about the merits of democratic socialism than we were 5 years ago. It’s something that won’t go away, dominos are falling. Trump having destabilized things only helps broadcast issues that have always existed within this society and usher in new ideology that aims to address those issues. Modern politics is becoming more and more like progressives versus traditionalists, with each passing day. That evolution, away from left versus right, is evidence that capitalism is on the defensive.
This guy isn’t a socialist. Neither are politicians like Bernie. Also universal healthcare and food stamps aren’t socialism either. Likewise countries like Denmark and Sweden aren’t socialist either.
The biggest issue with this country is that people just don’t know what they’re talking about, and this applies to the left and right. The right freaking out over him and the left fawning over him is really baffling. Mamdani’s politics are unironically considered centrist in the rest of the developed world.
Growing up on the 60s and 70s, we constantly heard about how we had to prop up terrible dictators, because the Communist/ Socialist system that would replace him would be worse.
But like you, I always thought that Communism/ Socialism was the natural bridge between a Dictatorship and a true Democracy. The Dictator goes to far in abusing the citizens, they rise up and take the country back for themselves.
Unfortunately, that usually means another dictator - Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. At that point, the citizens start to get behind the idea of electing their leaders.
That is, if they don’t get taken over by ANOTHER dictator.
You raise valid points, yet I think we’re talking about different kinds of Socialism in a way. Your form of socialism here is like a Cold War era form of the ism. That form is often thought of as something which needs be imposed in a top-down fashion unto society — an inherently vulnerable approach. Look to history, a lot of 20th-century “socialisms” were really authoritarian states using socialist language to justify centralized control, and they did often end up as new dictatorships.
I think what I am aiming for, though, is not socialism as a bridge from dictatorship to democracy, but as a result of capitalism evolving beyond its own contradictions. More like democratic socialism: cooperative ownership, strong social infrastructure, but still open markets and innovation. It’s less about revolution or replacement, and more about integration. A phase where capitalist systems start to internalize social equity and worker participation as competitive advantages rather than ideological opposites. The socialism Id advocate for can (and maybe should) rise organically from the bottom up.
Great post, clarifying some of my vague notions. I’m no expert political scientist, so I appreciate constructive explanations.
I have always liked the idea of blended political dogmas. I think that any philosophy, from the right or the left, would be disastrous if it went to their extreme ends. The best solution is choosing the best elements from every political philosophy (they all have something) and reject the stupid stuff (they all have something). That’s difficult, because many people can’t handle nuance, and worse, MOST people can’t agree on what those muances should be.
Our country is good example of a blended political philosophy, that can’t get its arms around the nuances. We need to make some serious adjustments, but unfortunately our nation has been taken over by people with evil political philosophies that respect only money and oppression.
Democratic Socialism is an excellent example of a blended philosophy that honors the citizens, and not just their wealthy overlords. We are already there, in great part. Many of the best, most deeply-baked concepts in our society are already Socialist, like Public Education, Public Libraries, Parks, Fire Departments, etc.
Expanding this philosophy, and making it the driving force behind our society, is exactly what this nation needs at this crossroads we are at. It is either that, or the most oppressive form of fascism imaginable.
There’s a 3rd type of socialism that was more rarely spoken of in the 60’s and 70’s, because it didn’t have the drawbacks of centralized soviet style communism and therefor was more difficult to demonize: Anarchism. This ideology was successfully implemented for a few years in parts of Spain during their civil war, and its success in creating a non-hierarchical decentralized and free society even attracted George Orwell to visit it, and join their cause to fight for what they were building.
It was eventually crushed by both fascists and communists, as both sides were terrified of that concept spreading. If we’re able to implement it again someday, possibly in a spot where it would be much harder to crush militarily, then it would be a genie impossible to put back in the bottle, as it would be so self-evident in how superior of a way of life it provides to everyone, without the downsides of a centralized dictator.
I’m in my middle aged years, whatever I’ve read of him seems hopeful if he’s the future. Also not from the US but if they can vote in someone like that for, what is considered one the the top cities in the world’s, mayor that is encouraging. If elected I hope he proves what is better for people.
Seriously we always have someone okay vs someone that wants to take away benefits from the less well off of our neighbors and friends (I will say I’m luckier but not exactly out of that group). It’s refreshing to see someone to least state he wants to make a better balance.
Heaven forbid billionaires make a few less dollars that they only use to influence things to their preferences. No one is perfect but his ideals have merit it seems.