I didn’t vote for Zorhan Mamdani in the Democratic primary, but neither did I vote against him. I voted for Brad Lander, and I didn’t rank Andrew Cuomo, so my vote basically was symbolic.
I like Mamdani, and I regard him as a mensch (a decent, ethical person). I also like his ideas about the city, although I don’t think they can be realized without a more radical governor. His lack of experience was one reason why I hesitated to vote for him, but my main reservation was his agenda about Israel and Palestine. I don’t know what it is.
It rankles me that people of color can express solidarity with one another, as can women and transpeople, but not Jews. If the reason is that we are “white adjacent,” to use a trendy progressive term, I don’t buy that. The solidarity of Jews is the major reason why we have survived as a people, and I feel it deeply. I also respect Jews who don’t feel that way, and who are dedicated to the pursuit of social justice instead, because, in my view, that is their practice of Jewishness. They are neo-Bundists, to reference the left-wing Jewish labor movement of the early 20th Century.
So am I, up to a point. But to me the survival and well-being of half the world’s Jews is meaningful. And so, I support the existence of Israel. The original rationale for Zionism was that a stateless people with no control over its destiny will always be the victim of violence. That premise is now being proven by the slaughter in Gaza, and it’s why the Palestinians also must have a state.
In Mamdani, I don’t just see a socialist. I see someone who emerged from a part of the left which believes that Israel should not be a Jewish state. I assume that he wouldn’t be a member of the Democratic Socialists of America if he didn’t have that conviction. But his rhetoric is much less clear then the chants I heard as they marched by my window last spring. For example, he has said a number of times that Israel has a right to exist, adding the key words as an equal society. To me, this stipulation means that he supports a Palestinian right of return that would soon create a Muslim majority in Israel. I may be wrong, but he hasn’t said anything to change my impression. In fact, he hasn’t said anything at all about what the future of Israel should be. I guess evasion is common enough in politics, but this issue demands concreteness, not agile rhetoric.
Then there’s his refusal to “police” the term global intifada, although he’s said that it’s “not language I would use.” There’s more to this remark than has been widely quoted, so here’s the rest of it, from Mamdani’s interview with The Nation. “I understand what it means to those who use it, but my concern is always: what does it sound like to those who don’t already agree with you?” It seems to me that he thinks global intifada is an impolitic term, but what about its meaning? Defending free speech by refusing to police it doesn’t preclude making a judgement; in fact, criticism is part of the process. But a portion of the Palestinian movement specializes in elusive slogans. Some activists say that global intifada merely refers to the struggle for liberation, but there has never been a non-violent version of this term. Even its use in regard to the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, which Mamdani has cited, is about armed resistance, not the civil disobedience practiced by Gandhi and King.
Does Mamdani support armed resistance against Israel? It isn’t entirely clear. He says that he’s interested in creating change through persuasion, but what kind of change? Barack Obama faced similar reservations when he was tied to a radical black church, and he handled them by making a brilliant speech about his own politics and the persistence of racism. Mamdani has yet to deliver that sort of speech. His dynamism and energy have spared him from having to make a tangible statement about the future of Israel. I don’t blame him for being oblique. It’s a very hard task, and a risky one. But his ambiguity doesn’t inspire my trust. If I liked equivocation, I would have voted for Cuomo.
On the other hand, I’m horrified by those who have baited Mamdani by calling him an anti-Semite. I received some of those mailings, and I was deeply offended by them. He is certainly not an anti-Semite, and I have no doubt that he cares about the Jewish people. My favorite of his assertions is that the fate of Jews and Palestinians is entwined. As I said, he’s a mensch. But as a mayor? I’m not sure, which is why I voted as I did. But that was the primary. We’ll see about the election.