Inez Stepman: How Socialism Seduced New Yorkers
How did Zohran Mamdani’s rise happen, and what does it tell us about the future of the Democratic Party?
Is Zohran Mamdani's success in New York politics the mark of socialist resurgence or just a reflection of a deeply fractured party base? Zach Weissmueller is joined by two very concerned New Yorkers. Our own Liz Wolfe and Inez Stepman, who's a policy analyst at the Independent Women's Forum.
Stepman critiques the ideological cocktail attracting young New Yorkers to socialism. She argues that Mamdani's appeal is more cultural than it is economic, which leads to a discussion of whether libertarianism can actually be effective in combating Mamdani-esque movements.
Mentioned in the podcast:
"HSTPA Impacts Study," by the Real Estate Board of New York
"The Daily Dirt: 5 Questions With Socialist Mayoral Candidate Zohran Mamdani," by Kathryn Brenzel
"The Most Detailed Map of the N.Y.C. Mayoral Primary," by Martín González Gómez, Saurabh Datar, Matthew Bloch, Andrew Fischer, and
Mamdani's homeowner policy memo
Clip from Eric Adams' speech blasting socialism
Mamdani's talk at the 2021 Young Democratic Socialists of America Winter Conference
Chapters:
00:00—Podcast theme
00:24—Zohran Mamdani and the new face of the Democratic Socialists
05:12—Class resentment, college debt, and the upper-middle-class left
11:19—How socialism distorts incentives and degrades culture
17:32—The myth of New York's liberal monolith
22:53—Rent freezes, housing politics, and urban affordability myths
30:53—Are YIMBYs being misled by progressive rhetoric?
35:22—The cultural core of Mamdani's politics
41:45—Why Inez Stepman broke with libertarianism
48:54—Policing, public safety, and the stakes of a Mamdani mayoralty
57:58—Mental illness, civil liberties, and involuntary commitment
01:08:00—What Mamdani's rise means beyond New York
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I blame Immigrants.
Promised free shit that others pay for? Same as every socialist.
moved
Out of NYC, or into?
No, it was just a great movie.
GTFO with "seduced" bs.
New Yorkers have always been in favor of socialism.
Is Zohran Mamdani's success in New York politics the mark of socialist resurgence or just a reflection of a deeply fractured party base?
Yes, and sort of. They are not the fractured party, they are doing the fracturing.
I listened to bits and bobs, and I can't recall listening to so much college-freshman-level babbling in a long long time.
"Libertarianism cannot maintain the culture that is necessary to support libertarianism." Or some word salad.
If she wanted to say "Government is authoritarian. Deal with it." she should just come out of the closet and say so.
Government is NOT society. People create society from the ground up, spontaneously. Government is control freaks trying to mandate their vision of what society should be.
Don't hurt people and don't take their stuff.
"Libertarianism cannot maintain the culture that is necessary to support libertarianism." Or some word salad.
Eh, I dunno, it was P.J. O'Rourke who was being interviewed by Nick Gillespie who said Libertarianism will never be a major political force in this country because Libertarianism is an anti-political ideology.
That's why it was so important that we don't just tear down USAID, but we do it carefully using the apparatus of the state that put it there.
I think what it really comes down to is that libertarianism doesn't catch on because most people just don't want that much freedom. It comes with risk and uncertainty.
That's true. But more to the point, I think, is that the government has taken control of so much of our daily lives that no one is going to be foolish enough to give up their piece of the pie without some guarantee that everyone else will too.
Didn't Ayn Rand famously accept her Social Security pension because she wasn't fool enough to turn down free money?
I think what it really comes down to is that libertarianism doesn't catch on because most people just don't want that much freedom.
That's not right. Libertarianism has an uphill fight because too many people get paid by government, and we lose that fight in 3 minutes because our "spokespeople" are extremist cosplayers.
I don’t think her reasoning was because it was “free” but rather that it was hers to begin with so she was taking it back with interest for the loan to the government.
PJ was totally cool with whatever the Covidians came up with. Not my go to libertarian. Really regret buying his books.
the real answer is "the same way socialism always fools the masses"
With its own special opiate; "vote for me and your life will be like the backdrop of a Star Trek movie."
You mean fake?
which leads to a discussion of whether libertarianism can actually be effective in combating Mamdani-esque movements.
The answer to that is clearly 'no' as it has failed to combat Mamdani-esque movements.
Also, I saw some demographic breakdowns of Mamdani's votes, and apparently he's very popular with middle and upper class, white New Yorkers. Everyone else? Not so much.
"...apparently he's very popular with middle and upper class, white New Yorkers."
Yep, that would be the champagne demographic, all right. Read the New York Fucking Times and vote for a fucking communist. Just warms the fucking cockles of their fucking hearts.
[Ok I'm all out of f's to give, so here's a rats ass for the rest of 'em].
Sometimes fs are all you have left. And In 10 years even that won't be enough.
"...ideological cocktail attracting young New Yorkers to socialism."
That "ideological cocktail" is known as champagne [socialism]. So virtuous to drink, as long as you believe you will never have to give up anything in return [let the hoi polloi, who serve as proxies for our causes, do that; they never knew the good life anyway].
All that is happening is the democrats stopped lying about their goals.
"Inez Stepman: How Socialism Seduced New Yorkers."
The headline should read, "Inez Stepman: How Socialism Seduced Useful Idiots on the Left."
How Socialism Seduced New Yorkers
I don't think it had to work too hard at it.
When they pulled the lever they though they were driving a stake through the very heart of Trump.
A reminder: Mamdani and socialist visions did not seduce "the people" with free stuff, unless those people all have above average wealth and privilege. The strongest support came from the limousine liberal set, motivated by virtue--the kind they want to impose on unappreciative actual working class families.
"Identitarian socialist Zohran Mamdani declared he was 'Black or African American' on college applications"
https://thepostmillennial.com/identitarian-socialist-zohran-mamdani-declared-he-was-black-or-african-american-on-college-applications