Zohran Mamdani is Resurrecting Socialism in the Heart of Capitalism

“Hope is alive”. That was one of many declarations made by New York’s new mayor, Zohran Mamdani, to be met with rapturous applause at his victory speech in Brooklyn. He is right to say so, having achieved what many considered to be impossible. Overhauling all the odds, whilst defying billionaire and MAGA support, to defeat former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, first in the battle for the Democratic Party nomination and then again last night, is one thing. To do it as a self-proclaimed democratic socialist of Muslim and immigrant descent is another.

Mamdani now has the chance to do the impossible again. He campaigned relentlessly on the issue of ‘affordability’, pledging to attack the cost of living crisis by freezing rents, opening city-owned grocery stores, making public buses free, lowering the cost of childcare, and raising the city’s minimum wage. Whether he succeeds in making the USA’s most expensive city and ‘financial epicenter of the world’ more affordable for the workforce that sustains it will define American political discourse in the years to come. Many in the right-wing press think he doesn’t stand a chance, others, in particular President Donald Trump, will do everything in their power to ensure he fails. Yet Mamdani is well-aware of the obstacles in his way. In fact, he seems to revel in the challenge that they represent. 

But before turning single-mindedly to the future, it is vital that we take a moment to fully investigate Zohran’s unprecedented success, mapping out the blueprint that his campaign leaves behind. So, how did a man who faced repeated and unashamed Islamophobic smears, comparisons between his potential victory and the 9/11 terrorist attacks, ceaseless fearmongering regarding his pro-Palestine position, and endless name-calling from Donald Trump, win a majority share of votes across New York’s five boroughs? Why didn’t the tens of millions of dollars spent by billionaires such as Michael Bloomberg, Ronald Lauder, and Bill Ackman in support of Andrew Cuomo stop Mamdani from surpassing 1 million votes?

The answer is inevitably complicated and multifaceted. However, in internal Democratic Party discussions, left-leaning newsrooms, and progressive political parties across the world, two factors – one technical, the other ideological – will undoubtedly take centre stage. 

The first is strategic and centres on the issue of communication, a deep source of struggle for those on the modern left. Experienced left-wing politicians on both sides of the Atlantic will be hyper-conscious of the difficulties posed by a perpetually hostile media environment. It becomes impossible to maintain message discipline and focus on policy proposals when, for example, Piers Morgan would rather bombard you with questions about whether a woman can have a penis – just ask Zack Polanski. As journalism becomes increasingly less profitable as an industry, necessitating that newspapers and broadcasters are to be sustained by a wealthier, more powerful and more conservative few, this is a problem that will only get worse. In America, The Washington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos, Fox News by Rupert Murdoch, and even the supposed ‘bastion of free speech’ X by the notoriously censorious and politically-motivated Elon Musk. It is simply implausible that the traditional media establishment, which serves to support the interests of this elite group, would ever give democratic socialists or even social democrats a fair shake.

Mamdani, however, recognised that hazard. Indeed, he did still engage with corporate media when necessary, ‘duking it out’ with independent candidate Cuomo and Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa in debates and delivering cutting one-liners that subsequently went viral on TikTok. Yet, broadly-speaking, his was a campaign that bypassed traditional outlets, opting instead for an aggressive social media strategy that enabled him to deliver his words and policies, unfiltered and uninterrupted, to the people of New York. His ‘joyful’ posts garnered hundreds of millions of views from across the world, turbo-charging his name recognition in just a matter of months.

In decades gone by, this would have been a fruitless game plan; refusing to engage, or indeed falling out of favour, with political kingmaker Rupert Murdoch has long been an electoral death sentence in much of the English-speaking world. But in 2025, when more than half of American citizens get their news from Facebook, X, YouTube and TikTok rather than from more traditional forms of media, this radical new approach is becoming an entirely viable and increasingly effective option. It is worth sparing a thought for independent US senator Bernie Sanders, another self-avowed socialist but of an era which saw him forced to regularly humour and engage with unsympathetic pundits from Fox News in large part due to a lack of alternative means to promote his message. Now, in this new age of social media, there is an alternative. Everyone has a microphone, and no one is required to share it.

Nevertheless, we must be wary of associating ‘Mamdani mania’ solely with the technical competence and strategic excellence that underpinned his campaign. Indeed, that will likely be the sin of those on the right of the Democratic Party, having made the same mistake in the aftermath of Trump’s presidential election victory last year. As the Republicans returned to the White House with an overwhelmingly powerful mandate, winning both the electoral college and popular vote, many establishment Democrats were quick to point to Trump’s flirtation with the ‘manosphere’ on YouTube and X as the driving force behind his win. It was, they claimed, not really an issue of policy but rather a deficit of online presence that endeared Trump to voters and doomed Democratic candidate Kamala Harris.

In hindsight, it is clear that this kind of analysis is deeply flawed and limited; Harris’ campaign had also dedicated significant attention to social media, going viral earlier in the summer when Charli XCX affectionately declared that ‘kamala IS brat’. Yet such a superficial evaluation of the Democrats’ defeat ultimately proved comforting, enabling the experienced centrists at the wheel of the party to ignore the gaping hole at its heart. In truth, however, Harris failed so spectacularly in her bid to succeed Joe Biden because she repeatedly reaffirmed her commitment to the status quo. In one interview, she admitted that she ‘couldn’t think of anything she’d have done differently’ to the former president. She reneged on most of her radical proposals that might have attracted voters, instead developing a ‘Wall Street-Approved Economic Pitch’ that was ultimately met with firm disapproval by the actual electorate and, ironically, many people on Wall Street themselves. As Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg, both of whom attended Trump’s inauguration, proved, the left never wins when it panders to the right. Why opt for the inauthentic imitation when you can have the real thing instead? That is a question that Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer is still yet to answer, having frequently co-opted far-right rhetoric to very little effect in Britain.

Ultimately, authenticity is the difference between the centrism of Harris and Starmer and the democratic socialism of Mamdani. The latter’s political message, which resonated profoundly with New Yorkers, was defined by hope: a hope that things can change for the better. If successful, the new mayor’s radical policies will undoubtedly improve the lives of millions of the city’s residents, many of whom are struggling to cope with soaring rents, eyewatering childcare costs, inefficient public transport, and extortionate food prices. Mamdani offered solutions, not just ‘more of the same’. If the Democrats again return their heads to the sand, refusing to acknowledge that the content of Zohran’s message was just as vital to his victory as the way that it was packaged, they may never return to the White House. A potent combination of radical policy and fierce communication offers the only route to beating MAGA at the next presidential election. Let us hope that Trump’s opposition realises that fact in time for 2028.

Mamdani certainly won’t wait till then. If there were previously any doubts about whether the new mayor would actually take the fight to Trump over the next few years, his first speech in power will have put them firmly to bed.

Though met by a chorus of cheers, it may not have been the shrewdest opening gambit to immediately seek to agitate the most powerful man in America with whom Mamdani will undoubtedly have to work. It is still far shrewder of New Yorkers to have elected a keen enemy of Trump than a man in Andrew Cuomo who has been described as a ‘bully and a sex pest’ by former staff members and would have been entirely compromised by ongoing legal ‘dramas’ surrounding the many sexual harassment allegations against him.

New York has clearly done the right thing. It is now up to their firebrand new mayor to repay the favour to the best of his abilities. If he pulls it off, if rents are frozen, public buses are made fast and free, and state-run groceries stores put more food on the table, the left will have a socialist blueprint for the digital age. At a time when the far-right runs rampant across Europe, it needs that now more than ever.

All eyes are on New York. Zohran Mamdani may indeed know that Donald Trump is watching, but he will soon learn that the rest of the world is watching too.