The recent report from the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP) has thrust Democratic Socialist candidate Zohran Mamdani into the spotlight, just as New Yorkers prepare to cast their votes. The 38-page document lays bare serious concerns regarding Mamdani’s past affiliations and rhetoric, as well as his connections to individuals and organizations accused of promoting anti-Israel sentiment. With Election Day fast approaching, this report raises significant questions about the direction of New York City’s leadership.
Stephen Miller, a former advisor in the Trump administration, did not hold back in his critique. He tweeted, “Like good commies, they will NOT arrest the criminals or gang members, but they WILL arrest their political opposition. THAT’S how society dies.” Miller’s statement highlights a broader fear surrounding Mamdani’s platform, which leans heavily toward the radical left, including policies that challenge conventional law enforcement practices.
Many allegations against Mamdani revolve around his time as a leader in Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) during college, where he reportedly failed to denounce inflammatory slogans such as “globalize the intifada.” This phrase is thick with implications of violence, raising alarms about Mamdani’s perceived tolerance of anti-Semitic rhetoric. ISGAP founder Charles Asher Small stated clearly what is at stake: “It is incumbent on voters to understand the ideological context that Zohran Mamdani comes from and espouses.” Such context could shape not only the safety of Jewish communities but the city’s civic fabric as well.
One notable aspect of the ISGAP report is the mention of Mamdani’s ties to Imam Siraj Wahhaj, who has a controversial past linked to the World Trade Center bombing. A photograph of Mamdani and Wahhaj together serves as visual evidence that critics say signals Mamdani’s endorsement of radical views. Additionally, a significant $100,000 campaign contribution from a super PAC associated with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) raises further concerns over foreign influence in local politics.
The report is unequivocal in its assertion about Mamdani’s avoidance of explicit condemnation of violent terms and slogans that can incite hatred: “He has repeatedly declined to condemn the slogan ‘globalize the intifada,’ ignoring the fact that the word ‘intifada’ is synonymous with terror attacks, suicide bombings, and incitement to kill Jews.” This refusal to disavow problematic phrases compounds the wariness among communities concerned about rising antisemitism.
Despite the backlash, Mamdani has surged ahead in the polls, particularly among younger voters and immigrant communities fed up with issues like high housing costs and systemic inequalities. His platform champions public housing initiatives, police funding cuts, and resistance to federal immigration enforcement, positions that clearly resonate with a segment of the population seeking radical changes.
Opposition is unrelenting, with figures like former President Donald Trump labeling Mamdani a “100% Communist Lunatic.” Trump warns that Mamdani’s potential victory could jeopardize federal funding for New York City, suggesting dire economic repercussions should Mamdani assume leadership. Furthermore, Congressman Andy Ogles has escalated the matter by formally calling for a review of Mamdani’s citizenship status, labeling him as “antisemitic” and a threat to the city.
For his part, Mamdani publicly addressed some of these accusations, leading a march from Brooklyn to City Hall, where he sought to affirm his position and rally support. His assertion of intent to legally defend the city against budget cuts resonated with many constituents and reflects a combative stance against perceived attacks from his political adversaries.
The ideological rift within the Democratic Party has never appeared sharper. While Attorney General Letitia James showed her support for Mamdani, others in the party, including prominent figures like Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, have voiced serious concerns about his record. Former Governor Cuomo—who lost to Mamdani in the primary—has remained hesitant to endorse him, suggesting a deeper divide within the party.
Documentation cited in the ISGAP report reveals that Mamdani has previously supported targeting charities that back Israel and has described Israel’s military actions as “colonial violence.” Such statements, along with a compilation of virulent social media clips and detailed campaign finance records, paint a concerning picture of the potential environment Mamdani might foster if elected.
As Small of ISGAP stated, “The antisemitic discourse of Mamdani will inevitably lead to increased hate and violence.” His warning serves as a litmus test for the future. It emphasizes that the election is not merely about social issues, but about maintaining the foundational values of the city: religious tolerance and civic unity. The vocal opposition from the Jewish community, as evidenced by hundreds of rabbis signing petitions against Mamdani, underscores the urgency of these concerns.
If he wins, Mamdani would become New York City’s first socialist mayor in over a century, likely facing daunting hurdles, including potential federal cutbacks in funding and contentious relationships with local agencies, landlords, and business leaders. Miller’s grim assessment reflects broader apprehension about the consequences of a Mamdani administration. He posits this election as a critical juncture not just for New York but for fundamental American values of law and order.
As polls open soon, the entire nation watches closely. The implications of this election could reverberate well beyond the borders of New York City, shaping the future of urban governance and community relations across the United States.
"*" indicates required fields
