Zohran Mamdani and New York Jews are in a bind with each other. This is the core of the knot: [1] NYC is home to a major, even singular Jewish community, and Israel is a fulcrum of Jewish identity. There is no way to undo what are two vital and dynamic connections, between Jews and NYC,  between Israel and the Diaspora. [2]  Especially after 10/7 and the war against Hamas in Gaza, Israel is a fulcrum of anti-Semitic animus. Many Jews feel it on a consistent basis. There is no way to undo completely the connection between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism and its social impact. [3] It is bad politics to ignore, neglect, or undermine a vital part of one’s political base.

Ignore any argument that Mamdani himself is an anti-Semite or that his ethnic and religious identity have anything to do with the race for mayor and Mamdani’s campaign. The very notion is a racist and Islamophobic starting point that civil society cannot and should not tolerate. Ignore also analyses that omit as a starting point the fact that the overwhelming percent of U.S. Jews support the State of Israel, if not its government, and are deeply alarmed by anti-Semitism in American life. (On the far progressive left wing of NYC politics, Mamdani has begun to address the latter but is unable to concede the former). The same goes for the readymade refrain that “anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism” and the unthinking assertion that Zionism is “essentially” in conflict with Palestinian rights.

Mamdani is running for mayor on affordability, hope, and no little charm. Israel and Gaza and Palestine were background noise to the primary campaign, at the very most a loud distraction. A fair observer will grasp immediately the alignment between Mamdani and liberal and leftwing Jews and Jewishness on core human and social values. This alignment has helped win over many Jewish supporters, including NYC politicians like Brad Lander and Jerrold Nadler. Critics of Mamdani (among who I count myself) remain upset by his record on Israel. Cuomo made hay of it, as will Eric Adams. To be sure, the politics of Israel and Gaza and anti-Semitism is fair game and relevant, but maybe only to Jews and hardcore anti-Israel activists, not to anyone else.

For their part, many Jews will be unwilling to ignore the binary climate after October 7 and the sharp spike in anti-Zionism as an engine of anti-Semitism. NYC Democrats nominated a young and inexperienced leftwing populist with deep roots in the anti-Israel movement. At 33 years of age, Mamdani is too young to have put any distance between himself and his record from the very recent past of statements and affiliations. No indication has been given that he will moderate his own views on Israel and Palestine, which are decidedly extreme, and move towards a viable, pro-peace policy agenda that come anywhere close  to meeting the views of a dominant segment in the American Jewish community. In 2021, Mamdani spoke at a rally organized by Within Our Lifetime and Samidoun, two extremist anti-Israel groups, in which he said there is no distinction between the fight here and in Palestine, i.e. calling to bring “the fight” here, to NYC, in front of a sign calling for intifada. The candidate’s recent Globalize the Intifada/Warsaw Ghetto conflation was no gaffe. His empathetic answer to Steven Colbert (with Brad Lander sitting by his side) conceding the reality of anti-Semitism in New York City and the atmosphere of fear and insecurity today makes no connection to any of this.

The nub of the problem in November might very well be public safety for a great many New Yorkers and for a great many Jewish New Yorkers at this particular moment. Mamdani claims that he no longer supports defunding the police, but there is every reason to believe he’s prevaricating. When asked about the threat environment experienced by many Jews, Mamdani has been empathetic. As a guest on the Steven Colbert Show, he reassured his viewers that a Department of Public Safety and $800,000,000 in anti-hate training will keep Jewish New Yorkers safe. Mamdani took the same line at Meet the Press after winning the primary. About what are now real threats of anti-Semitism in society, Mamdani said, “And I’ve heard those fears, and I’ve had those conversations, and ultimately, they are part and parcel of why in my campaign, I’ve put forward a commitment to increase funding for anti-hate-crime programming by 800 percent.”

These words are far from reassuring. There is no reason to believe anti-hate programming and a Department of Community Safety will keep New Yorkers safe, especially members of minority communities, including New York Jews at this moment. Not because Mamdani is an anti-Semite. He is not. The failure lies in the inability to grasp what connects radical movement-politics against Israel and real blowback in society faced by Jews in the City and country. Public safety is the sore point of questionable policy ideas advanced by a candidate so inexperienced that the editorial board of the NYT said in the run-up to the primaries he had no business being on the ballot to lead the biggest city in the United States.  If Mamdani wants to build bridges to the larger Jewish community, he could help all of us dial back the extreme, binary anti-Zionism, which, he has said, is at the core of his own political identity. There is little reason to hope the truce will hold between Mamdani and a not insignificant core of liberal Jews who support him despite his alignment with binary anti-Zionism.  

About inflammatory anti-Israel rhetoric, Mamdani says repeatedly that he will not “police speech.” But observers will point out that hate speech directed at Israel and “Zionists” has been part of the threatening  cacophony roiling Jewish life today. Mamdani is not anti-Semitc, but “the movement” or large parts of it contribute to a dangerous echo chamber, and about this the candidate is not being honest. Calls for the destruction of a UN member nation and ostracizing Jews on the basis of an ideological litmus test are not calls for universal human rights. Will Mamdani as mayor tolerate inflammatory hate speech? Will his administration prosecute vandalism and other acts of violence against New York Jews, committed in the name of Palestine, as anti-Semitic hate crimes? Who will lead anti-hate training in a Mamdani administration, and will they recognize the overlap between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism? Is the candidate concerned about the weaponization of “Free Palestine” and the normalization of extreme statements like “globalizing the intifada”?

Even a pro-Mamdani column by Michelle Goldberg at the New York Times has a huge caveat placed in the middle of the piece. Goldberg is right to point out that the 20% of Jewish support that Mamdani received during the primary is likely to rise in the general election. To repeat, Mamdani is running on a set of values, if not policy prescriptions, close to many New York Jews. His vibe is, to say the least, “menschlich.” But Goldberg notes this reservation, even from the Jewish left, “One needn’t even be an ardent backer of Israel to have reservations about Mamdani. I’m worried about his inexperience, and I suspect he won people over by making economic promises that he can’t keep. Even though my own stance on Israel’s prime minister is closer to Mamdani’s than to Cuomo’s, I thought it was a terrible mistake for Mamdani to try to justify the phrase ‘globalize the intifada’ on a podcast this month. He’s right, of course, that the literal meaning of intifada is simply ‘struggle,’ but context matters. Mamdani should understand why many Jews find the words threatening, particularly after the murder of two Israeli Embassy staffers in Washington and the firebombing, just this month, of people in Colorado demonstrating for the release of Israeli hostages.”

Questions about the affordability of the affordability agenda are the big nut that will determine the election, not the “global Intifada.” These are the issues on which Mamdani is running and on which he will win or lose in November: maintaining New York as a sanctuary city, rent freeze on rent-stabilized apartments, free buses, a $30 minimum wage, a city-owned grocery store in each borough, a Department of Public Safety displacing the NYPD. Critics note the very expensive agenda has zero support in Albany, much less Washington. There is a lot that could go wrong –from negative impacts on public safety, availability and basic maintenance of housing stock and transportation networks, and capital flight. Mamdani demonstrated no penchant for compromise during his short tenure as a State Assemblyperson in Albany. As mayor, would he leave NYC poorer, actually less affordable, and less safe?

Mamdani deserved his primary win. Mamdani was everywhere, Cuomo nowhere. Cuomo was recognized as “entitled,” “arrogant,” and “aloof” by the very people who worked on his campaign. Cuomo could only hope to persuade enough New Yorkers that he will put his dark energy towards securing the public good, but there may be no buyers by this point. Decisions may turn out depending on how Eric Adams positions his own campaign, appealing to Black voters and Jews and Republicans and independents. By November it could be clear to many New Yorkers that Mamdani is, in fact, the best qualified candidate to win the trust of NYC voters. But none of this is certain. Going back to 1993, NYC voters have a track record of electing non-Democrats or dubious Democrats as mayor. Nothing guarantees that Madani’s run in 2025 will buck what is a more conservative trend in this most sapphire city.

Against complaints, particularly from non-Jews on the progressive left, that “fealty” to Israel is “parochial” and should not matter in NYC politics, I return to the basic point that Jews are a vital demographic in NYC and an important part of the Democratic base. One can demand that Jews in the Diaspora disaggregate from Israel, or cry about undue Jewish power, or decide that Jews don’t matter. These hostile takeaways are themselves anti-Semitic and give fuel to voices on the right who want to weaponize anti-Semitism against liberal society. The truth is that Jewishness carries a potent electric charge in society. Indeed, two loops form into a basic circuit at this political moment. Bad ideas for New York City are bad for New York Jews. Bad binary thinking about Israel reflects broader, harsh social polarization that is ultimately bad, even dangerous, for New York City, especially now in the Age of Trump.

Mamdani is running for mayor as a democratic socialist. Voters in this big city will draw their own conclusions about his platform. On Israel and Palestine, however, which should matter not just to Jewish voters, Mamdani has done nothing to distance himself from a public discourse caught up in either/or binaries that only amp up the right and undercut civil society while undermining efforts to build Jewish-Muslim relations across a broad social spectrum.