It’s 2025. Why are we still talking about communists?
Because Republicans.
It’s like: It’s 2025. Why are we still talking about civil rights?
Woke Leftist Communist Marxist DEI Antifa. They resent empathy and any attempt at equality. That’s why they’re so proud to be Christian! Jesus wasn’t empathetic at all, unlike those weirdo LGBTQ oddballs!
Democrats really need to get their shit together:
Full Title: Democratic Senator Gillibrand Goes on Islamophobic Rant Against Mamdani: The Democrat’s rant has sparked calls for her to resign over her bigoted language.
Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (New York) went on an Islamophobic rant against New York City Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani in a radio interview on Thursday, spewing lies about Mamdani and suggesting that he would represent a threat to public safety if elected.
In an appearance on WYNC’s “Brian Lehrer Show,” the senator repeated numerous lies about Mamdani, echoing oft-repeated bigoted statements made about Palestinians and the pro-Palestine movement.
What a weird fucking headline…
Except that she’s 100% correct about Globalize the Intifada. It’s the linked article that’s lying.
“I don’t get it! Kampf just means struggle! Why do all of these Germanphobic bigots get so butthurt about my new book, Mein Kampf Zwei?”
Rolling Stone has a good article about what happened, and what Gillibrand said:
It’s harder to prove a negative. The article says that Mamdani has never supported “globalizing the intifada”. And that he’s campaigned on protecting Jews in NYC from antisemitism. And also, that he co-sponsored a bill that would restrict some funds going to Israeli charities that use some of their money to attack Palestinians. (I don’t recall the exact details, if they are in the article.) There’s a pretty big divide between not wanting to give money to groups you think are engaged in bad activities, and wanting to spread terrorism.
If anyone has evidence that Mamdani wants to globalize the intifada, or is more antisemitic than my friends who protested Israeli actions in Gaza (who, for the record, aren’t antisemitic at all, and I’d trust them with my personal safety), I’d be interested in seeing it.
I started with a, “not my circus, not my monkeys” attitude towards this mayoral race, but it looks like it’s going to influence the rest of the country, if only by the hate it spews. (Much of that hate is probably driven by his campaign platform to impose rent control, by the way. Which i think is a terrible idea and will hurt the city, but sadly, hate goes in weird directions.)
Quoting from this link (Marshall is a prominent liberal Jewish Zionist journalist):
"I’ve seen nothing at all that makes me think that Zohran Mamdani is an antisemite. That’s the main thing I want to say on this issue. Another key part of this is that Israel and Palestine were not really a major part of his campaign, in terms of what he was saying on the campaign trail or his messaging. That whole part of the campaign was either largely or entirely about him getting pressed to address, justify or denounce things he’d said in the past. That is fair. Every candidate is responsible for addressing views or statements from their own past record. (I note the distinction here because it’s important to understand the actual campaign Mamdani chose to run.) Mamdani is clearly quite anti-Israel in his politics. That’s a pretty consistent through-line back to his student activism days — which were only back in Obama’s second term. He’s endorsed BDS and various cultural boycotts; he’s a big critic of the occupation, which many of us are. He has used lightning-rod words like “genocide” and “apartheid.”
These are not my positions or views, certainly. But there are lots of political positions I disagree with."
To be super clear, two things can be true at the same time.
-
I don’t think Mamdani is antisemitic.
-
I think his defense of the term “Globalize the Intifada” is absolutely deplorable.
I think there are non racists who said “All Live Matter”, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t call out the phrase. And it’s not islamophobic to do so.
But has he defended that term? The Rolling Stones article claims he hasn’t.
He refused to condemn it, IIRC. He (correctly) explained that it means different things to different people.
Thanks. If he were running for US senator, i might want to investigate his feeling on the matter further. But NY mayor is a pretty minor player in international affairs. His position on rent control is a MUCH bigger deal.
(He also has a lot of positions on housing that developers could get behind, like faster permitting and removing some of the requirements that make it expensive to build. Not to mention positions on other issues.)
I like most of his housing initiatives, though I think rent control is probably counterproductive. The problem of housing is generally low supply - that is fixed by building more housing. That’s not all of the issue, but it’s most of the issue.
I don’t know enough about him or his positions to say that, but i like many of his housing positions that I’ve seen, other than rent control.
Aka “Abundance”.
“All Lives Matter” and Confederate flags mean different things to different people, but I wouldn’t expect a progressive to harp on “heritage not hate” or the literal meaning that all lives do in fact matter.
Since there is no evidence about him supporting the specific meaning that you dislike, this is pointing more to the conclusion that there would be very little to complain if the Democratic candidate was not a Muslim.
I would expect a politician who doesn’t want to completely turn off voters who hang a Confederate flag for not-very-racist reasons to say something like that, honestly. Especially if the issue is mostly irrelevant to his platform and his potential office. Demanding purity on minor issues is a losing strategy.
And the Israel/Palestinian conflict is mostly irrelevant to being mayor of New York, and i haven’t heard anything to suggest he campaigned on it. (He answered questions, of course.)
Now, i think the voters should care a lot about whether his administration would forcefully and carefully investigate potential antisemitic incidents in NYC. He has signaled that he would, as much as any other candidate.
Show me some prominent Democrats who defended Confederate flags with “heritage not hate” type statements then.
“means different things to different people” is pretty different from saying, “i think it represents heritage, not hate”.
He didn’t just say it means different things to different people; he also said that it doesn’t make him uncomfortable because when he hears it he hears people calling for equality and an end to injustice.
So fine, find me a prominent democrat who didn’t say “Heritage not hate is my personal opinion” but who did say “Confederate flags don’t make me uncomfortable at all because when people fly them I see them celebrating their heritage, not being hateful”.