*THIS WAS DRAFTED BEFORE THE PRIMARY ELECTIONS*
Introduction
Much attention has been drawn to the New York City Mayoral election, scheduled for primaries in June and the general election in November. Several candidates have entered the race, mainly from the Democratic camp, including State Senator Zellnor Myrie, Michael Blake, Speaker of the New York City Council Adrienne Adams, New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, State Senator Jessica Ramos, Scott Stringer, ghoulish hedge fund manager Whitney Tilson, sex pest and former Governor Andrew Cuomo, and our man of the hour, Zohran Mamdani. It has become increasingly clear to this writer that Mamdani's candidacy for mayor is quickly becoming a spectacle for the public eye and the contemporary "Left" in America. From memes to fan cams to online commentary, I am concerned that American voters are more interested in spectacle than action. An online mania has emerged similar to that of Luigi Mangione, whom I wrote about in December. From a personal perspective, I’ve noticed more Zohran posts than Gaza fundraising links or calls to action to resist ICE terrorism. I’ve seen hundreds of people online temporarily shift their revolutionary fervor towards a man they only realized existed a few weeks or months ago. This is not to say that Zohran is a bad person or that his politics are regressive. Instead, I question the contemporary "Left's" fascination with figures and spectacle instead of community work, mutual aid, and political education.
Zohran is not a psyop or a federal agent; he's a guy from Queens running a grassroots campaign for New York City Mayor. A declared Democratic Socialist, Zohran has stood out for several reasons. He is a young, handsome Muslim from a working-class neighborhood who first called for making bus fare free and establishing city-run grocery stores. Immediately, establishment media outlets like Fox News and the New York Post likened his ideas to Stalin or something similar. Most spectators are unsurprised by these assertions, given that ghouls run the right-wing media in New York. That said, Zohran's ideas have not gained widespread support among all New Yorkers. Notably, his poll numbers are low within Black and Latino communities [1]. We must take poll results with caution, as their strategies and data vary widely and are often biased before data collection. However, it raises questions about the contradictions within New York's population and its most overlooked communities. Zohran's appeal resonates with those more attuned to contemporary American politics, who believe that extensive social programs are long overdue. If you have a college degree and do not experience the severe social and economic stratification faced daily by millions of New Yorkers, supporting Mamdani might seem plausible. For others, however, Mamdani's brief time in New York politics and his "radical" ideas, often obscured by mass media, may make support difficult. Wrestling with your daily life is what’s most important here. For these older and more skeptical New Yorkers, Andrew Cuomo remains the preferred choice, given his years in politics and his now overshadowed role in COVID-19 cover-ups and staff sexual harassment allegations. Cuomo symbolizes stability and a storied history in New York politics for these voters.
Becoming a Politician
While Zohran is likeable, he should not be elevated beyond critique. In my opinion, no candidate is perfect, and the very idea of becoming an American politician seems to me a degrading and regressive venture. Zohran’s background is quite notable, growing up in a multicultural home in Uganda, South Africa, and finally New York City. Mamdani was naturalized only recently, in 2018, demonstrating close ties with his voter base, which includes immigrants and working-class New Yorkers. His father, Mahmood Mamdani, is a renowned scholar at Columbia University, teaching courses in postcolonial studies and authoring works like Neither Settler Nor Native and Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, the Cold War, and the Roots of Terror (La CIA et La Fabrique du Terrorisme Islamiste is the French publication… interesting no?). I include this background information because, in my view, Mamdani has a lot to live up to; even his middle name is attributed to revolutionary icon Kwame Nkrumah.
Zohran’s campaign was characterized by a bright and welcoming character, which attracted a broad coalition of voter bases and effectively utilized the ranked-choice voting system in New York City. After the first Mayoral debate, Zohran’s team moved to ally with other progressives in the city, such as Brad Lander, Michael Blake, Adrienne Adams, and Chi Osse. I am not endorsing these candidates, but I do think it speaks to Zohran’s strategy. Unlike the Kamala Harris campaign, Zohran did not adopt right-wing rhetoric, nor did he pander to the manufactured “migrant crisis” that politicians like Eric Adams and Andrew Cuomo have been aggressively criticizing. Instead, Zohran adopted a more populist approach, utilizing his social media presence and youth to his advantage. After being threatened with a car bomb, Zohran’s campaign decided to walk from Washington Heights to Battery Park in one day, a trend I have often seen performed on TikTok [2]. This demonstrates Zohran’s ability to employ newer electoral strategies, combined with a form of online activism that his opponents are falling behind in. As of today, June 25, 2025, Zohran Mamdani has secured the Democratic nomination for Mayor of New York City, an achievement that even I was shocked by. Cuomo’s political apparatus, ties, connections, and donor list were poised to crush Mamdani’s progressive platform, but it’s clear that New Yorkers want Cuomo out.
The Debates and Critiques [3]
While I believe Zohran is, at face value, a well-intentioned and kind person, it does not change the nature of American politics. In a city like New York, the insistence on the police department being a friendly and helpful body is standard to all brands of progressives, Democratic Socialists, liberals, and Republicans alike. I found that the NYPD's political designation during the first Mayoral debate was one of the most discussed topics. Some candidates have a more aggressive stance on the NYPD being the ultimate peacekeeper in New York City. In contrast, others believe the NYPD should present a friendlier image and improve its public relations. Cuomo and Tilson attacked Mamdani repeatedly on his position to “defund the police”. Ironically, I have never heard Mamdani call for defunding the police in his campaign rhetoric. Mamdani has opted to take a more neutral stance, advising that he wants the NYPD to do fewer mental health checks and focus on “crime”. Furthering this, Mamdani stated that he wants to “listen” to beleaguered police officers who are feeling the weight of their less coveted responsibilities and work with them to improve the function of the police. This position worries me personally because we are unsure of how Mamdani will handle the aggressive police force in New York City. If Mamdani had his ear to the ground as his campaign claims, he would know that the NYPD's brutality is unmatched in the city. The city spends millions of dollars yearly to cover the NYPD’s many abuses. Longtime New York City abolitionists have called for the disbanding of the SRG Unit of the NYPD. Will Zohran listen to our demands or try to find a middle ground?
In the realm of housing, I was also disappointed by Zohran’s responses. Much akin to the other candidates, Zohran holds that housing issues could be solved within the sphere of Capitalist reproduction and private investment. While Zohran does call for “freezing the rent” upon election, it does not address New York City’s burgeoning housing crisis. Freezing the rent would be incredibly helpful and initially, a nice gesture, but it will fail to uproot the systemic issues plaguing the housing market. I found that the best responses on housing came from Scott Stringer and Michael Blake, who subtly suggested that expropriating major landlords and creating an abundance of new, affordable housing units could help solve the crisis. Of course, while their solution would be more direct, it does not remove the issue that originates within the contradictions of Capitalism.
Electoral Politics, Superstructure, and Base
I often cite Critique of the Gotha Programme in my writings, and for good reason [4]. Marx’s work helps us understand that the push for reforms and change should be understood more structurally, questioning who these reforms are really for. It can be hard to see how truly influential and powerful the Bourgeoisie is. A fundamental understanding of Capitalism is how it maintains market domination through its structure and base.
Observe this diagram and take note of what it’s suggesting. What maintains the base shapes the superstructure, and vice versa, with nothing able to escape this dynamic. In the realm of electoral politics and politicians, we can apply this model to reach an informed conclusion. Even if a politician has good intentions and runs for office out of a dedication to the community, they will never be able to achieve true working-class power. Not because they are gutless, but because the rigidity of the Capitalist structure prevents it. Individual actors cannot fix this system; therefore, it must be structurally challenged. Electoral politics in America are essentially a dead end, but there are also larger discussions to be had, which I will address. However, the reality is that one person cannot bring about the change we want to see in society; what we seek is a complete overthrow and abolition of the current system. Politicians want to abide by Capitalism and search for a solution in it, but we see no end to it.
Zohran, Memes, and Spectacles
A great deal can be observed from the surge of Zohran-related content over the past few weeks. Overnight, it seemed like Zohran’s media presence boomed with an influx of memes, fan cams, and promotional content. A lot of it was in good taste, but there were some things that I felt were over the top. I found there was a particular fascination with Zohran’s physical appearance, which later extended to his wife. There is a growing trend in the online political sphere to quickly transform everything into a meme or a joke. Additionally, there exists an urge to form a parasocial relationship with any person who gains recognition of some kind. Following the news cycle with Luigi Mangione in December, I heard discussions about him in person, just as I had seen online. Memes and online discourse were converted into real conversations with minimal abstraction. A majority of this rhetoric was about Luigi’s physical appearance and his wardrobe. While he had been discussed somewhat seriously in the news cycle, he had quickly become a meme, an image completely separated from the alleged political act he committed. Again, I saw this pattern repeated with Zohran, with some events even being led by “Hot Girls for Zohran”. Call me a purist, but I think framing political action around physical attractiveness, especially by using women’s bodies, is strange and counterproductive.
How does this fascination with Zohran’s appearance and appeal apply to our understanding of superstructure, base, and Capitalism? I wanted to get to the root of this question myself after the Zohran hype first emerged. From my perspective, it seemed that Americans, or maybe most people, idolized public figures or events in such a way that they became mere images or objects. A sort of fetish, it seems to me, arises from the internal contradictions of Capitalism and how they influence the world. The mode of production within Capitalism confines humanity to a reality where mass wealth provides next to nothing. Guy Debord explains how production can obfuscate our reality and produce a series of icons that he refers to as “spectacles”. At the crossway of immense accumulation and destitution, humans have little left to cherish, resulting in a series of spectacles [5]. Memes, pop culture, and public figures are the best fit for our particular analysis, and I think they represent the “spectacle” in a palpable way. Let’s face it, people often feel like they possess very little within modern society. Bankers and media bureaucrats own our cars, homes, and social experiences. Most of what the average person owns is probably knick-knacks, gardening tools, and leaky faucets. Capitalism produces so much while leaving so little, producing international crises and violence wherever it goes. When society succumbs to such a reality, it makes sense why we perceive everything in maximalist and totalizing ways. The media boom surrounding Zohran also applies here, as New Yorkers have seen rising costs and shrinking social safety nets in recent years. The public sees American politicians at large as greedy, power hungry misers who want to get rich quick at the expense of everyone. For the last two years, the world over has witnessed a genocide in real time. Extreme violence of this kind can only be seen as a miserable and disturbing reality.
Online buzz about Zohran has turned him into a spectacle, a commodity, a fetish. I don’t want to single him out, of course, this happens with every major celebrity or figure in America again, because we are offered so little. Commodity fetishism is the form of the spectacle, where life is both tangible and intangible as a result of our alienation from it [6]. Consumption is one of Capitalism’s many gross effects, which encourages us to consume everything, all the time. Visual media, like memes, are an example of this. Some voters are looking towards Zohran to serve in his role as Mayor and provide for the city, while some want to see him in office because he’s not a Republican — the contrast is stark here. Life can feel like being in survival mode, and consumption can help us feel a semblance of normalcy. I think that the immediate infatuation with Zohran in the form of memes, despite his likability, is what’s notable here. I saw it as a result of people who are truly desperate to see radical changes, and that’s okay, but we should try to resist the urge to idolize at all costs. Information overload is a very real phenomenon where we feel inundated with media, news, gossip, and more in a matter of seconds, 24/7. Anna Kornluh describes this phenomenon under late Capitalism as “immediacy”:
Immediacy crushes mediation. It is what it is. Self-identify without representation, ferment with ‘no words’. The pre-fix ‘im’- connotes that negation—in the middle without intermediary, #NoFilter—as well as a prepositionality: the inness or onness of immersion, intensity, and identity. An estate of direct presence, always on, continous, abundant, sui generis. Immediacy’s pulsing effulgence purveys itself as spontaneous and free, pure vibe. Let it flow, let it flow! But in this imperative lies a grind [7].
Reactions, Racists & Ultra-Lefts
Let’s talk about three groups: the overhyped, the reactive, and the downright racist. For those excited about Zohran winning, I think that’s completely valid. Many New Yorkers view this as a significant step, driven by working-class neighborhoods and rejecting establishment Democrats. If you’re skeptical (also valid), you have to realize that Zohran legitimately did do, at least try to do, something new. He challenged Andrew Cuomo and won, employing strategies that no other campaign had previously used. He was able to mobilize first-time and disillusioned voters. He was able to rally Muslim New Yorkers in a way we should all commend. Of course, this comes with some caveats. Marxists understand that elections in America are essentially a dead end. Before becoming radicalized, a lot of us had faith in AOC, Bernie, and the Squad because we thought that seemingly good intentions translated to good politics. With maturity comes a deeper understanding and new conclusions. If you want Zohran to win, you also need to develop an attitude of critiquing and combating politicians immediately. I know without a doubt that some Zohran voters will celebrate and then go right back to brunch. Please do not do this. Zohran’s base presents a significant organizational opportunity to transition from elections to establishing a genuine community praxis. Talk to your neighbors, learn their names, and strike up conversations with them. Do they need anything? What’s their story? How is the government failing them? As Communists, it is our task and duty to stay alert and listen to the masses who seek to change society. Currently, we are at a standstill, with nobody willing to break with the status quo and bring about real change. Liberation is not found within the ballot box, but now that this opportunity is here, we should seize it. Communists should be sharp and seize opportunities to instill radical change, moving with the masses. If you vote for Zohran and choose to do nothing else, you are a traitor to the movement.
Now for my favorites: the Ultra-Leftists. I was honestly baffled by some of the reactions coming out after Zohran’s primary victory. It goes without saying that for the more studied crowd, you don’t need to be told twice: we will not see liberation from voting. This is an apparent reality, I think a majority of us realize at least partially. There exists a brand of Communists that can only be described as “Ultra-Left”; these uncompromising types steel themselves in nihilism only and reject outright the historical realities we face. Twitter brats like Unity of Fields went on an ideological tantrum about Zohran’s victory, talking down to the masses as if they were unthinking children [8]
Their tweet reveals a few things. Firstly, it shows that they are disconnected from the masses in New York and the mass work it took to run Zohran’s campaign. Secondly, it implies that people who are cautiously optimistic about Zohran’s victory are reactionaries and class traitors, likening them to idiots. It is unnecessary to tell the movement that Zohran, as Mayor, will fail to address structural issues; we already know this. Relaying political analysis in such a flippant and condescending way only makes people feel alienated from the prospects of Socialism. Dedicated Communists and revolutionaries should steel themselves in precise political analysis, uncovering the roots, and revealing them to the masses. “It is not enough to explain to the workers that they are politically oppressed. Advantage must be taken of every concrete example of this oppression for the purpose of agitation” (Lenin, 1929, 57) [9]. Within Zohran’s campaign lies a pristine opportunity to seize the moment, analyze, and intervene—this is the duty of all revolutionaries. Instead of bloviating on Twitter, Unity of Fields should go outside and organize with their community. I was happy to see at least some well-thought-out analyses as counterpoints: [10]
Currently, the American “Left” offers no clear solutions for disillusioned Democrats and working-class people. Organizing should create a network of broad-based coalitions focused on a specific set of revolutionary politics aiming for the same goal. Like the tweet says, we need to push for an alternative and build dual power within our communities. Marxists need to recognize that history unfolds in stages, and we should analyze this process in real time. Instead of just complaining, we should develop creative solutions and turn situations to our advantage. While organizing, you may encounter individuals who are aggressive, indifferent, or even ultra-reactionary. Remember, not everyone is born with fixed beliefs; there are material and historical reasons behind their perspectives. When you realize this, you develop humility and understand that people are shaped by structures largely beyond their control. Your job should be to mediate where possible and offer support and analysis to the people you meet.
We should go to the masses and learn from them, synthesize their experience into better articulated principles and methods, then do propaganda among the masses, and call upon them to put these principles and methods into practice so as to solve their problems and help them achieve liberation and happiness” [11].
— Mao Zedong, 1943
Finally, we have to address the virulent racists and mass Islamophobia following Zohran’s win. I had a feeling the right-wing reaction would be bad, but I think I underestimated its severity. Elected officials like Vickie Paladino, Randy Fine, and Andy Ogles began referring to Zohran as “little Muhammad” and are now calling for Zohran to be denaturalized and deported. Ogles even asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to look into Zohran’s citizenship status and link him with ties to Hamas to have him deported [12]. Islamophobia is truly an American cultural value, as the masks come flying off when it involves Muslims. I was pretty aghast at the level of hate, with even some politicians in New York joining in.
Both of these politicians are Democrats from the suburbs of Long Island, so their insistence on becoming Hitlerites isn’t too surprising. The Red Scare and rampant Islamophobia are alive and well in America. Here, too, lies an opportunity to organize around. When communities are under attack, people on the Left should rise up and defend them. Right now, we are witnessing kidnappings on our streets and hatred being spewed against marginalized communities. It is on all of us to stand up for them.
Conclusions
I apologize for covering so much in one article, so if you’ve read this far, thank you very much! Gathering accurate historical analysis is essential for all of us. When we conduct principled analysis and self-criticism, it keeps the movement fresh, humble, and honest. Our goal is to create lasting change through class struggle, both in theory and in practice. Zohran’s victory in the primaries demonstrates several points. Life can be an abstraction, simultaneously becoming both tangible and intangible. When it feels nearly impossible to take control of our lives, consumption often fills that void. Suddenly, it seems as if our shiny objects symbolize our power in life, because in every other area, we frequently feel powerless. Turning a political figure into a meme exemplifies how Capitalism turns social life into a series of commodities and spectacles. The fact that a handful of people can kill the oppressed and deplete the Earth’s resources can be pretty surreal. In the form of commodities and a degraded reality, we eek out a little enjoyment. It makes sense why people are so stoked about Zohran, not because they are idiots, but because they have so little hope left.
Indeed, the ballot won’t bring us liberation, but what if we intervened? What if Communists in New York City used the momentum of Zohran’s campaign to organize their communities into structured groups? Right now, we need people willing to support immigrants and fight against ICE. We also need committed individuals prepared to do the often tedious work of building a revolutionary organization that takes care in its efforts. Groups aiming to provide aid to their communities and gradually foster revolution should be praised. The painstaking process of organizing in a way that is both revolutionary and patient is not to be underestimated. For this reason, I take issue with Ultra-Leftist reactionaries like Unity of Fields. Talking in such a chauvinistic manner is not only insulting but counterrevolutionary. Types like these admit that they are disingenuous and allergic to allying with the masses. It is incumbent upon Communists that they observe, study, and take action. If you want to scare off potential allies, then please, by all means, continue to ignore reality. When opportunities present themselves, we should strive to identify the root of the matter and explore how we can get involved. Right now, there is a golden opportunity to organize our community in meaningful ways and, yes, endorse Socialism. “Perhaps there is already a Soviet Republic in Germany? It seems not! How then can one speak of ‘reversion’? Is this not an empty phrase?" [13]. Here, Lenin accused European Ultra-Leftists of being hypocrites for being so adverse to participating in parliamentary elections. What I like about this quote is the sarcasm, with the Ultra-Lefts being so antagonistic to specific strategies, Lenin can call them out for it. I am not arguing in favor of elections; I, too, see them as a dead end. However, I argue that with proper analysis and interventions, we can effectively promote Socialism to people who aren’t aware of it yet. We can support our communities in tangible ways that weaken the power of the state. If you want to build a better world, you need to believe in it too.
Thank you for reading!
Notes
Anuta, Politico, 2025
Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme (the whole book)
Debord, Society of the Spectacle, pg. 1
Debord, Society of the Spectacle, paragraphs 35-37)
Kornbluh, Immediacy or the Style of Too Late Capitalism, pg. 6
Twitter, Unity of Fields, https://x.com/unityoffields/status/1937935525291106789?s=46, 6/25/25
Lenin, What Is To Be Done?, pg. 57
Twitter, maoisthnvx_25, https://x.com/maoisthnvx_25/status/1938330472452432186?s=46, 6/25/25
Mao, Writings On Organization & Mass Line: Get Organized!, pg. 118
Mohammed, Zohran Mamdani faces racist smears and calls for citizenship to be stripped, Middle East Eye, 6/27/25, https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/zohran-mamdani-faces-racist-smears-calls-citizenship-stripped
Lenin, Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder, pg. 39