Skip to main content

Mayor Mamdani

Mamdani

"Democracy,” H.L. Mencken wrote, “is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

 

The general public in New York City will not know what they have got until Mayor Zohran Mamdani has been in office for a few years. The  logical consequences of policy decisions take  some time to mature, and even then political analysts will long after be  at loggerheads squaring circles. We are just now finding out, for instance, that U.S. Senator Adam Schiff is a monumental but successful liar many years after he and other prominent Democrats, hoping to sink a future presidential campaign of Donald Trump, floated an improbable story that Trump was in cahoots with Russian President Vladimir Putin to deny Hillary Clinton a fair shot at becoming the nation’s first female president.

 

The New York Post published, two days prior to the election on its opinion page, a piece titled “20 reasons to vote against NYC mayoral front-runner Zohran Mamdani.” Some political watchers who have been carefully monitoring Mamdani’s political ascendancy, taking notes and assembling his far left pronouncements, think Mamdani is, on account of his Marxist tendencies, uneducable. A thousand years as mayor may not budge him from his chosen path.

 

Here are a few of the Post’s reasons to vote against Mamdani:

 

1. He hates the police

 

Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani called the NYPD “racist, anti-queer and a major threat to public safety. His “apology” rings hollow, saying that it was for “the language that I used” — but not the sentiment. His plan for public safety would instead send “mental health teams” without police backup on 911 calls, because negotiation is key when you’re about to be shoved onto the subway tracks.

 

2. He really hates the police

 

The number of officers in the NYPD is at its lowest level in 20 years — below 34,000. Outgoing Mayor Eric Adams wanted to increase the ranks to 40,000 by 2028. Mamdani insists on no additions — and is noncommittal about shrinking the agency. He claims he doesn’t want to “defund this rogue agency” as he has said in the past. But then he suggests that’s exactly what he’d do. “It’s not a question of headcount. It’s a question of safety,” Mamdani said recently.

 

3. He hates the police — with a splash of antisemitism

 

“We have to make clear that when the boot of the NYPD is on your neck, it’s been laced by the IDF,” Mamdani claimed. To Mamdani, a few collaborative training exercises between the Israel Defense Forces and the police department is (sic) a full-blown conspiracy theory. The NYPD draws on the experience of many groups (including for community outreach), but since Israel = Evil in Mamdani’s worldview, the program must end. Mamdani is right that we need to help the mentally ill living on our streets, but he doesn’t have a realistic plan. He says his outreach teams will provide counseling, but any treatment program will be voluntary. How can someone who is mentally ill make decisions in their best interest? We’ve seen this movie before. Mayor Bill de Blasio spent $1 billion on his wife’s Thrive initiative, which prioritized a phone hotline. When schizophrenics told city workers they didn’t want to go to a shelter, they were allowed to sleep on the floor of a subway station. Expect more of the same — and worse.

 

6. He’s never met a failed idea he didn’t like…

 

Among the failed ideas Mamdani warmly embraces is socialism tinged with a communist imperative – to seize the means of production -- an overweening ambition that, everywhere it has been implemented, has invariably led to an impoverishing state managed economy, increased government control of both culture and politics, and the withering away of democracy and  republican  governance. Communists since Karl Marx have always set their faces against tradition, history and reality.

 

Marx wrote in the epigrammatical notes to his Theses on Feuerbach," published by Engels after he died, "Philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it." The epigram is engraved on Marx’s tomb in the Eastern cemetery of Highgate Cemetery, North London, England.

 

Mamdani’s frequent mangling of his own easily produced recent comments on politics and culture should surprise no one. His point, like that of Marx, is not to interpret meaning but to abolish it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

PCBs, GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH

By Gerald and Natalie Sirkin c2007 A front-page story on PCBs in the March 9 News-Times is just wrong. The first thing to know about PCBs is that they never killed a single person nor did they ever cause cancer. The second is that although they are invariably called “cancer-causing,” that designation comes chiefly from a single rat study. The third thing is that the subject rats were exposed daily for 21 months to 100 parts per million (ppm) of PCBs containing 60% chlorine. (The 100 ppm was about 5,000 times the tolerable daily intake of PCBs set by FDA in 1973.) When rats were exposed to PCBs containing less chlorine, they developed no cancers. The fourth, that when the exposed rats were allowed to live out their lives, they had fewer cancers and lived longer than the unexposed rats. PCBs is a family of chemicals known as polychlorinated biphenyls. PCBs contain chlorine ranging from 12% to 70%. They were used in two General Electric plants that manufactured electrical equipmen...

Taking The Fifth, After Esty

Whether or not U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty will serve the remainder of her term or resign immediately is very much an open question. But, in any case, the battle for Connecticut’s 5 th U.S. Congressional District has begun with a show of unexpected fireworks. For many years, the 5 th District was a toss-up proposition; both Republicans and Democrats have held and surrendered the seat. Geographically the 5 th District touches the border of New York from Connecticut’s northern-most point to Danbury in the southern quadrant and includes much of Litchfield county and parts of Fairfield, Hartford and New Haven counties. Party affiliation is competitive, in round figures, 30 percent Democrat, 25 percent Republican and 45 percent unaffiliated. Over the years, the Democrat Party in Connecticut has moved from the center to the left, but the 5 th District has been a moderate preserve. During the Obama presidential election, Republican moderates within Connecticut's U.S. ...