Here is a sample subscription for you. Click here to start your FREE subscription
- Growing Authoritarianism at the UFT as Unity continues to take Lying shots at ABC
- A Tale of Two Meetings - Plus Two More to Come - OY!
- Election Thoughts - Mamdani and ABC Organizing, Finally, a UFT Win in a Mayoral Race, My Interview with Daniel on the '75 UFT Strike
- A Mayoral Mess: Is Mamdani Support Fading Despite Cuomo Massive Transgressions, Sliwa Hangs In, UFT Retirees Battle Each Other
- The 1975 NY Teacher Strike: Its History and Impact - Norm on Talk Out of School Tonight at 7PM
- More Recent Articles
The
more restrictive people in power get in an attempt to tamp down critics, the more
likely their crackdowns spike greater opposition and more critics.
How do you distinguish between fascism and authoritarianism? And how do you fight fascism when you yourselves are authoritarians? Authoritarianism allows limited freedoms but maintains strict control over political processes.
A Unity initiative to make chapter leaders sit down and shut up was
voted down. This was remarkable—the exception that proves the rule. It
would have mandated top-down messaging from UFT at all levels. -- Arthur Goldstein Notes on the Nov. DA
Unity leaflet attacks DSA claiming they are infiltrating the UFT with MORE as an instrument but also attacking Marianne Pizzitola. Then months later they endorse the DSA candidate for mayor.
Saturday, Dec. 6, 2025 The line between fascist and authoritarian rule can be fuzzy, but there is a difference. I'm not referring here to the Trump MAGA crowd, which clearly leans fascist. I
don't like to call people fascists and prefer the label of "fascistic-type behavior" but the MAGA crowd is clearly beyond wanna-be fascists. Is authoritarianism and fascism the same thing? I Googled the question:
Authoritarianism is a general form of governance defined by the
centralization of power and limited political freedoms. (A check for both Unity and other Caucuses in the UFT) Fascism is a
specific, far-right, and highly ideological form of authoritarianism
that includes elements such as extreme nationalism and often racism. All
fascist regimes are authoritarian, but not all authoritarian regimes
are fascist. Authoritarianism is a form
of government where power is concentrated in a single leader or small
group, and there is little to no accountability to the public. It
suppresses political freedoms, limits individual rights, and often uses
control, fear, or violence to maintain power, with citizens expected to
show blind submission to authority. (Check) The theme here is UFT/Unity Caucus and authoritarianism. When people engage in authoritarian-like behavior it's OK to call then authoritarians, and that is an appropriate label for the UFT leadership, as I will offer examples below.
I would not term the behavior of our UFT/Unity Caucus leadership fascistic - that is pure hyperbole. But "increasingly authoritarian" is more apt. The prime directive of
authoritarian led organizations is to maintain power - often at all costs and that fits the Unity machine perfectly. Think of these characteristics of authoritarianism and compare them to the UFT/Unity crowd. Has
the UFT/Unity leadership shown indications of this behavior? Let me
count the ways. Call them authoritarians. Just don't call them fascists. Key characteristics of authoritarianism (as related to the UFT/Unity leadership):
Concentrated power: A single person or a small group holds most of the power, with little to no accountability to the people.
The
UFT has had four presidents over 60 years. Just think of that. The
faces may change, but the political machine remains the same. Thus, when
people attack Mulgrew as the problem, I point out the problem is Unity -
when Mulgrew goes, only the face of the machine will change. While the
leadership often seems incompetent, they have proven very competent at keeping
control, managing the membership and holding on to power, though recently they have been lucking out due to the lack of an effective opposition, a situation going back decades. Right
now we see that even inside the Unity machine, whereas there may have been
some sense of people being consulted in the past, we now have 3 Men in the room:
Mulgrew, Barr, Sill - and at times a woman: Mary Vaccaro. But the ABC
campaign with many Unity defectors indicated some cracks in the machine
for the first time. One of their complaints was that there was a sense of being consulted in the Randi years - though not all that much but she knew how to play the game -- but now even the officers in Ad Com are ignored - other than the gang of 3+1. Below that level, there is some unrest and recent aggression has been aimed at tamping it down. A sinking ship may be kept afloat with vigorous pumping but ultimately that is a losing battle.
Suppressed freedoms: Individual rights, such as freedom of speech and the press, are limited or denied to prevent opposition and maintain control. Limited political opposition: Opposition parties are often discouraged, prohibited, or have their legitimacy attacked.
Look
at the control of the DA. Barr must approve all leaflets put on the
table at the DA, after cancelling the 25 year old history of having a
table for non-official materials, granted by Randi Weingarten in 1998.
We had a battle with a UFT employee guarding the table during DA to make
sure no scurrilous lit goes on, violating decades of policy. That is her assignment at the DA. She and
LeRoy claim Covid as an excuse. Jeez. I called them out on this policy at the November DA. Unity Attempts to Bennett Fischerize chapter leaders A Nov. DA Unity backed reso, defeated, called for limits on free speech of chapter
leaders and their freedom to communicate with their members, following
the example of the suppression of RTC Chair Bennett Fischer's ability to
communicate with RTC members. Many of us have urged Bennett to make a
big deal of this censorship and in fact send in his report and if
Mulgrew censors it make a big deal of it, but instead he is circumspect
in those reports. The
RTC leadership seems worried that Mulgrew will turn off their
electricity if they push back too hard. The RTC leadership has already turned off any
vestige of militant resistance. I get lectured all the time that UFT
leadership are not enemies and we must stick together to fight fascism.
Hard to fight fascism when you have to work with authoritarians who want
to suppress democracy. Some in RTC argue that Unity is not an enemy but fellow UFT members and we have to work with them in a bipartisanship way. That's how the Democratic Party has operated while Republicans smash them to bits. You won't find a Unity leaflet or social media post that doesn't try to
slime ABC, demonstrating where they see the real threat to them. Every Unity leaflet and social media post attacks ABC and makes false
claims ABC opposes increasing para pay or decreasing class size, false claims of course. They brand critical comments over the inept methods they use as an attack on the union. Recently they held a demo at the city council over the para reso - 3 staffers showed up and they considered that a success. Jeez. Control and fear: They may use various methods like corruption, misinformation,
propaganda, or violence to ensure compliance and discourage dissent. How about the June massacre firings and more that came in September? Undemocratic practices: Authoritarian systems often ignore or subvert democratic processes, sometimes even while holding elections. Yes
Virginia, there was some playing around during the elections but not
enough to make them lose --- they were confident of winning due to the
two oppositions running against them but if the day comes when and if
there is one strong opposition, watch for the dirty tricks. The 54% they
got is a big threat to them and they need ARISE to stay alive to make
sure ABC doesn't win. Remember electronic voting? They formed a committee to study it that has started meeting with ABC and ARISE reps - naturally the committee is packed with Unity. Do you want to wager on Polymarket whether the committee will vote for electronic voting at future elections? Emphasis on obedience: Members are expected to show obedience to authority, sometimes referred to as "blind submission".
The 54% Unity got in the election plus the losses in the RTC and para chapter are warning signs. They are lucky so far due to the divisions in the opposition, and I will get into these divisions in upcoming posts. But expect further crackdowns on democracy, which often has the opposite effect of spurring open and hidden opposition. (Think of the fall of the Soviet block, which lasted 70 years as Unity control of the UFT approaches that number.) Is a cornered party as dangerous as a cornered rat? We
should be sober: the political winds are blowing hard against the
"ruling party". (Your favorite group in power)______ are staring at a meltdown...
defections
mount and internal chaos spreads throughout leadership. ... Tom Hartmann
The big firings were meant to send a message to the Unity rank and file. From what I'm hearing, there is fear - but also resentment. The firing of D. 30 rep Ashley Rzonca who was loyal to Unity but fired for perceived friendship with Amy Arundell, is having repercussions. A batch D. 30 CL are refusing to attend district rep meetings and are meeting on their own at the same time. The union went whining to the Dist Supt about these alt meetings in the schools. Perfect behavior of a cornered party. Go ask the boss to help you beat down a revolt. So far internal chaos has not spread and they have weathered the threat to the Delegate Assembly they were facing from the 300 delegates from retirees plus the 100 MORE delegates. We've seen a withering away of the retiree delegate impact, due to the incompetence of the Retiree Advocate/RTC leadership, as we will see in upcoming posts and the work Arthur has been doing to expose them. And the MORE 100 have had zero impact and have not shown much interest in the DA. And so far the ABC crowd has gotten off to a slow start this year and also has not organized at the DA. Some on all sides are talking about giving up at organizing at the DA. I think the DA for at least through next year has potential if all the delegates from RA, MORE and ABC managed to put something together. Go bet on Polymarket if you think that is possible. I'd sooner bet on a meteor like the one that wiped out the dinosaurs.
But change might come from another direction outside the caucus structure. The
big firings were meant to send a message to the Unity rank and file.
From what I'm hearing, there is fear - but also resentment. The firing
of D. 30 rep Ashley Rzonca who was loyal to Unity but fired for
perceived friendship with Amy Arundell, is having repercussions. A batch
D. 30 CL are refusing to attend district rep meetings and are meeting
on their own at the same time. The union went whining to the Dist Supt
about these alt meetings in the schools. Perfect behavior of a cornered
party. Go ask the boss to help you beat down a revolt. Unity's best chance of maintaining power is the divisions in the opposition. I think ABC has the most potential but don't expect the legacy caucus driven groups to join the party as the same principle of oligarchy driven organizations operates with them as it does with Unity: The prime directive of
authoritarian led organizations is to maintain power - often at all costs. Retiree Advocate has become the power in the Retiree Chapter - at least until the next election in May 2027 and has been losing its way, which Arthur has been chronicling.
Beware of old boss becoming the new boss - the dangers of a loyal opposition seeking alliances with authoritarians in power.
I'm getting more interested in the snacks than the agendas at the DA and RTC meetings. Wednesday, November 19, 2023
Today is a Delegate Assembly (HO) and tomorrow is a Retired Teacher Chapter (HUM) meeting and I have no interest in handing out a leaflet, a rare occasion for me. I'm going to both but less and less I hold these meetings to be as important as I once held them to be. I'm more interested in the snacks than the agendas and I give props to RTC officer Michele Ravid for improving the snacks at the RTC meetings by 200% over the Tom Murphy regime. See, there is value in winning elections.
The ABC organizationally has not put a lot of organizational energy into the DA, though some individuals have. To outsiders, A Better Contract seems to have gotten off to a slow start this year. After a brutal election campaign, people needed a rest. I appreciate some of the thoughtful discussions in trying to find some structure that keeps the idea of a loose affiliation of individuals, but looking for ways to act as an organization when necessary. I'm somewhat on the fringe of ABC, more observer than activist. There is still a lot of interest in ABC as demonstrated when ABC held
an open mass meeting a few weeks ago and 1000 registered and hundreds
attended. So, last night a quick (45 minutes) meeting was held to talk
about the working groups -- and Last night I attended a quick (45 minutes) meeting of those who attended the mass meeting and volunteered for various working groups - a bottom-up structure that fulfills a member-driven agenda. If some people don't find a working
group they are welcome to start one. I love that sense of freedom. There is also a need to have some way of touching base between the working
groups and I have confidence in the people who are doing the work.
Someone always seems to pick up the ball. If a ball doesn't get picked up that is a sign of lack of interest. One unstated rule -- no gnashing of teeth. As long as the groups adhere so some basic member-driven principles driving ABC, they have autonomy to act as they see fit with no central body to answer too. After decades of working with caucus top-down organizational structures, it was a breath of fresh air that satisfies my libertarian mentality which so seems to rile some of my comrades in other groups. As I rummaged through my basement recently I came across materials from groups I worked with in the 70s when we had a loose confederation of school and district level groups. Even the ICE/UFT group of 2003-10 had no organizational structure, something that drove some of the more politically oriented people, who have a built-in need for top-down organizing, crazy. It was made clear that we were not there to talk about elections or caucuses or share gripes but to move forward. It was reiterated that ABC invites any individual, whether in a caucus or not, to work with us. If a caucus wants to talk, ABC will do so. Chad Hamilton, a CL in Brooklyn chaired the meeting from his car - he wasn't driving at the time - I think. Super multi-media champ Leah Lin, a CL from D. 30 in Queens, is also playing a major role. These are mid-level career classroom teachers, as are most of the players. As a retiree, I believe we need to play a secondary role in ABC and not make our issues primary. There is a retiree working group to focus on those issues and I will play a role with them. I found the meeting exciting and looking forward to working with so many interesting people. A Tale of Two Meetings
Monday night Retiree Advocate organizers held a meeting and spent an hour discussing how to moderate the listserve and who should moderate the listserve (I am one of 4 moderators) with the goal of controlling attacks on Retiree Advocate. If any of the moderators object to a post, it will not go up. Hmmm, I wonder if this one will go up without objection. Maybe I'll object to my own post. ---- A bit of good news. It's been a tough few days waiting to get my 6 month scan and blood test for the tumor marker. Though the marker went up 2 points to 34 (below 40 is normal) it was 230 when I was first diagnosed, my scan came back Ok just as I was finishing this. So expect to put up with me till the next scan.
The most important outcome of the Mamdani win, and why he represents a threat to the right and the corporate Dems, is the potential for building a movement of people ready to act using the 100k volunteers for his campaign. Full disclosure: I was one and am ready to take more action if called upon. People are reminded of Obama in 2008 and the movement he built - and then let dissipate after he won and thus had no way to call out troops to battle the rise of the tea party in 2010. The Majority Report with Sam Seder, my fave, talked about this yesterday, speculating it was the influence of authoritarian Rahm Emanuel, the anti-left, corp Dem supreme who will run for president, who made sure the voice of the people wouldn't interfere with the usual suspects who want to run the world. The theme of this post touches on a theory of organizing related to elements of the Mamdani campaign and how I relate it to the ABC campaign on the fly last year where I find certain similarities based on not prioritizing personal and organizational ideologies over checking the pulse of those whose votes you are trying to get. I compare that approach to that of the legacy caucuses, and I include Unity, where the ideology of the leadership - and make no mistake, they all are leadership run, some for decades by the same people. Mamdani is a socialist but he didn't run on his socialism, though his socialism certainly has influenced his thinking. But no matter the attacks, you won't see him trying to take over the means of production, though I wouldn't mind it if the entire healthcare industry was taken over - wait, wait - like the NY Health Act. My contention here is that ABC was member-driven in the recent UFT election and expects to continue on that track. Thursday, November 6, 2025 Hey - big news -- the UFT leadership finally got one right - though it would have been nice to see an endorsement before the primary. But the way the endorsement went down has led many UFT members to object and there was a lot of push back from non-Mamdani supporters ---- and this dovetails with the theme of this election analysis: Listen to people first - check the pulse and be guided by what you hear. Mamdani is being credited, even by some on the right, with doing exactly that and shaping his campaign around listening. There is some irony in the out and out support for Mamdani Check out some of my commentary over the endorsement in July: But first, a plug. The 1968 strike gets all the attention, but the 1975 strike was in many ways more consequential. Here is a link to Sunday's interview with Daniel for "Talk Out of School" on WBAI. It was my third strike with the UFT but my first as an activist. Sunday Daniel
and I covered a lot of ground, including the opposition to Unity
leading up to the strike, its impact - short and long term, my guess
that the lessons were never to strike again, how the UFT descended from
the most militant union in the early 60s, the 1995 and 2005 contracts,
the divided opposition post-strike that continues today. Daniel's questions were excellent guides into a deep dive in my memory.
I still want to write in more detail using some of the resources from the 70s buried in my basement.
Now on to some election thoughts related to our union work. Mamdani Listened - Similar to ABC's Member-driven agenda -- Over a year ago, before anyone heard of Mamdani, A Better Contract/UFT decided to listen to the members and came under criticism from some members of the ARISE coalition. Ken Klippenstein touches on the Mamdani touch.
People’s comments were insightful for anyone who cared to listen. They were the message. Zohran Mamdani won by literally meeting people where they’re at — in
bodegas, subway stations, busy sidewalks, even at the New York Marathon.
He met people on the streets, not to pitch them, but to listen and
learn. These conversations informed his successful campaign more than
his charm, social media prowess or any of the other superficial
explanations major media are offering. ... The video
stood out from usual campaign content in how little of it focused on
the candidate. He didn’t “approve this message.” There were no gotchas,
no fact checking his opponents, no issue-oriented rejoinders. Virtually
every shot focused on the interviewee rather than Mamdani, whose face
you could not even see at times. He just stood there, quietly listening
to what people had to say. As Mamdani sees it, facing the public, even if it might heckle you, is
part of the job of being an elected official. Obvious as this may seem,
it is a more genuine and humble attitude ofthe Washington national
figures who believe that their role as philosopher kings is to reign
over and above the public. Mamdani’s view of a politician’s job contrasts sharply with the political establishment’s zero tolerance attitude toward risk. Mamdani’s magic is his understanding that the masses are the message.
Yes. Fundamentally, Mamdani didn't emphasize his own ideology, though that played a part in his activism, but listened to people - yes, even those who voted for Trump.
Horrors. How often was ABC attacked by ARISE for "listening to people who voted for Trump" -- we were accused of trolling. And yes, there are some people (a few it seems) who may be Trump backers, and at times there may be some tension, but so far they don't feel shunned. ABC people seem to believe that the way to build a winning coalition if you aim to win an election in the UFT, is to be broad-based and non-judgemental.
Yet Mamdani, the darling of the leftists in ARISE, did the very same thing and built his campaign around the issues people were telling him concerned them. Trust me, they will not learn a lesson. The ideology of most people on the left is baked into their DNA. In the recent UFT election and beyond, an ARISE steering committee member and a caucus co-chair has persistently criticized ABC for not taking political positions on certain issues ABC deemed divisive and outside the bounds of a UFT election sphere - it was termed being "apolitical" rather than what it was -- member driven. In other words, we would focus our campaign on what we detected in the pulse of rank and file in our schools and out surveys - our colleagues - and beyond. Rather than apolitical, we would try not to let our personal ideological views take precedence. The election results showed that was a potential winning strategy when we got 32% in a 3-way race, especially notable for a group of individuals that had existed for only a few months. My criticism of the ARISE coalition and how they operated was that they took an opposite tack -- the ideologies of the leadership of the 3 groups in the coalition -- MORE, New Action and Retiree Advocate - would drive their campaign. If you weren't somewhere on the left, you wouldn't be very comfortable - and they did pretty much attract the left to run with them and in the election, leftists in the UFT were more likely to vote for ARISE. And 14% of the voters did vote for them. Does 14% give us an accurate picture of the left in the UFT? Since only 28% voted think of what that 14% represent. Part 2
Well, I'm glad my usual pessimism didn't work out as I guessed 43% Mamdani 39% Cuomo 18% Sliwa The
Sliwa collapse was significant and those votes had to go to Cuomo, so
think of this -- Cuomo was probably in the low thirties and there may
have been a late Trump bump. Yes Mamdani went over 50%, but barely and the combined vote against him would have made this a nail biter in a two person race. My Rockaway neighborhood in Belle Harbor voted 10% for Mamdani, surpassed by Breezy Point's 7%, 186 votes, and I think I convinced a bunch of friends. That little blue area in Rockaway is Arverne (53%) Edgemere (57%) where I canvassed with 40 other mostly local volunteers. Note the solid Cuomo blocks in Staten Island through south Brooklyn, though Bay Ridge went for Mamdani and the northeastern Queens block. Also note the east side of Manhattan. My Murray Hill area went 59-36 for Cuomo. My politics are not safe anywhere. I pushed back against the NYC Retiree attacks and pro-Cuomo position. He had stated he was opposed to Medicare Adv --and I trust a socialist on that issue more than his opponents. But now is a time to try to get our issue in front of him as 1096 will expire on Jan. 1 and a new bill will be needed. Some of his allies on the City Council do back the bill. However, DC37 and the UFT are opposed and he does owe them -- I have a lot more to say on the election but I have to catch the ferry for my painting class at the UFT - I'm shlepping a bunch of acrylic paints and art supplies - this artistic stuff can tire one out.
Which is the bigger threat to Mamdani's winning? Cuomo/Bloomberg/Trump - an unholy alliance - or the UFT's perpetual loser mayoral endorsement? I just got a call from some of the few liberals in Breezy Point asking
my advice on the propositions and I informed them on what an awful
person Cuomo is -- I put him in Trump personality territory and may have
won two votes for Mamdani.
Who knew, that Orthodox rabbis support and defend Mamdani for speaking
truth to power? Their defense is so very smart and compassionate. https://youtu.be/7NmGPStXWl0?si=enDu0QNRIEphOZUU
While Mamdani has some big enthusiasm but there is not a lot of enthusiasm among some voters for either candidate - who do you hate more - Cuomo or Mamdani? No one really hates Sliwa.
President
Trump urged Republican voters in New York City late Monday to cross
party lines and support Andrew Cuomo for mayor as part of an 11th hour
bid to stop Democratic front-runner Zohran Mamdani from taking over the
reins at City Hall.
Wow - looks like Trump is getting desperate - why is he threatened by Mamdani? My guess he fears his ability to mobilize people - imagine if he has 90K volunteers, imagine a million people on the street. Oh, and Eli Musk just joined the anti-Mamdani crowd. Even Trump backers admit Mamdani has run a disciplined effective campaign. That scares them.
Monday, Nov. 3 - Election Eve I wanted to get this out before tomorrow and I hope to have a follow-up by tomorrow night. Surprise, surprise - It might be rambling just a bit. Even as I finish this up, polls show the election tightening to 4 points and tomorrow it could be 2 points. Bloomberg has tossed millions joined by other billionaires in a desperate attempt to stop Mamdani -- thus joining Trump who endorsed Cuomo. The negative ads seem to be working. I hope he not only wins but wins big. 45% to 40% with Sliwa dropping to 15%. Yet another poll shows: The most recent polls place Mamdani 14.7 points ahead of Cuomo, according to a RealClearPolitics poll average. The voting so far looks good for him -- especially this weekend's young people turnout, while last weekend it was the older folks which might favor Cuomo. Given the attacks on Zohran, ask yourself why Trump is so desperate for him to lose? One would think he would be happy to have a foil. To me that is the best sign of the threat Mamdani represents ideologically to Republicans and the corporate Dems who run the party. And to the billionaires. Just looking at the line-up against him should get him votes. The joy Mamdani's backers felt in June, though, has been morphing into some jitters, as his machine begs his 90k volunteers to go out and canvass to the last minute. (I hate canvasing but forced myself to do some.) Today's NYT takes one more swipe at Mandani with this headline:
Questions of Readiness Persists for Mamdani: Even some of his backers worry about his thin resume. "He is not ready," said Maria Fattore (from his Astoria territory), saying she had unhappily switcher her vote from Mamdani to Cuomo. And in Manhattan, an old hippy who was leaning Mamdani, admitted to misgivings. I'm not sure he has the experience to deal with what's going on in this city..."
I'll admit to some worries, especially based on my conversations with liberals who are voting for Cuomo - mostly non-Jews by the way, so Israel is not a factor, though one close Jewish friend from Long Island is very concerned and told me Rabbis in many synagogues are railing against him. Some people just don't care for him - they see phony charm and a
child of privilege - intellectual privilege for sure but also economic -
if he hadn't been accepted to Bronx Science, he would have never gone
to a public school - and a college few could afford. While he is adored
by many, we need to keep some level of skepticism. I have fallen for his charm and love his interactions on long interviews - see the one he did with John Steward on The Daily Show last Monday. He was also on Sam Seder's Majority Report last Wednesday - he has no fear of talking to anyone. I voted Brad
Lander #1 and Mamdani 2 in the primary, though my left-leaning instincts
pushed me towards the latter and still does. But if it were Lander
running instead of Cuomo at this point, I think he might win. Even some leftists see Zohran as a privileged scion, reaching above his head, as we see in this comment from a mid-career NYC teacher:
I say this as someone who voted for Mamdani twice; with all due respect, I think he’s an arrogant little prick who thinks really highly of himself for little reason. But, given the alternative, he’s got my vote. My frustration with Mamdani is that he has accomplished almost nothing in his life. But, he talks big. That’s all fine. But, when he’s finally at the moment of actually accomplishing something big (for himself), he turns his back on pretty much one of the only people (Marianne Pizzitola) I’ve seen in this city who has actually done something for working people. [I will delve deeper into the Zohran/Marianne controversy in a follow-up).
I don't agree with his assessment but it shows how some of his voters are thinking. On the other hand, much of the left is still glowing, as this In These Times Oct. 31 piece indicates where so much of his support is coming from. “Why are you so excited to show him to everyone?”
“Because we love him,” says Alam, who works the night shift from 5 p.m. to 1 a.m.
It’s a sentiment I hear from taxi drivers, nurses and restaurant workers. Zohran Mamdani on the Night Shift for Mayor: As Election Day nears, the Democratic mayoral candidate returns to his base among New York City’s multiracial working class.
The article points to how many city unions support him, including our own beloved UFT - and that has caused more than a little rancor in the ranks -- but that gets complicated, which I will try to untangle further down. Based on my political instincts, conversations with liberals, and my usual pessimistic outlook, I'm worried. The continuous fear-mongering attacks on him with the influx of billionaire money has had an impact - their goal is not just to make him lose, but to weaken him and make him ineffectual to prove socialist thinking doesn't work is their goal. Last weekend most voters were on the plus side of 50, which did not look good. But this past weekend the younger people came out -- so maybe it's a wash. Warning signs ahead. I will feel more nervous than elated if he wins. I see him as a unique political talent - his thoughtfulness in interviews even as he duck some issues and his likeability and sense of humor will carry him - but only so far. Thought and ideas are good, but as John Stewart pointed out to him last week: If you fail to deliver on the basics of running the city, there will be a harsh reaction -- remember Mayor Lindsay and the Feb. 1969 snow storm.
I believe that the honchos in both parties have a big stake in seeing a socialist failure as a way to put a stake into the heart of any progressive move to take over the Dem Party. That is what makes me nervous --- he will turn into Hope and NO CHANGE. Or worse, will be as unpopular as Chicago left wing mayor Brandon Johnson - though I don't follow Chicago very much nowadays and was proud when a Chicago union teacher was elected - but some of his speeches turn me off. I've been working on a piece on this election for over a week and the more I talk to people the more confused I get. I voted and canvased for Mamdani, but I go from enthusiastic support to questions. What keeps me in line are his opponents - the awful Cuomo and the Republican Sliwa, who I would actually prefer to Cuomo, who is an awful human being and not to be trusted, especially around women. I found the attacks on Zohran over the Medicare issue coming from retirees disconcerting because those attacks pointed us to Cuomo.
Can I make a guess based on my own personal contacts or my own "feelings"?
For instance, my sense of the Jersey gov race is that the Dem is an awful candidate and may lose - today's polls show a dead heat -- in some ways I think a loss for a center/right corporate anti- progressive Dem would not be the worst thing, though the Virginia gov candidate seems much better and will win. But I think Trump's cancellation of the Hudson tunnel helps the Dem.
In my circle of liberal friends I see danger signs. Last night I ran into a liberal friend (not many in my area), who is a neighbor. I reminded her of election night 2008 when she invited us over to celebrate the Obama victory. She is voting for Cuomo because she doesn't trust a guy as young as Mamdani. Another Rockaway liberal friend has mocked Mamdani and a couple we know from Brooklyn feel the same way -- even having a level of disgust towards him. None of these people are Jewish, so Israel is not a factor. My sense it is more about how young he is, their feelings he hasn't done much and is arrogant for running. In other words, his age and lack of a resume are resonating as much as the issues.
I get this from people -- they view Mamdani as a rich kid playing politics. So, how many people are voting for Mamdani or against Cuomo? If Brad Lander has run as an independent instead of Cuomo, I'd give him an even chance -- he would gather votes from the Cuomo haters and more Republican votes. Last week, in conversations with people I met in some of my classes and tours I gave, including some UFT retirees, there was clear support and even enthusiasm for Mamdani. But I had lunch last week with a guy who was on my Murray Hill tour -- from Riverdale with an 11 year old daughter - not a teacher but a businessman running his own business in the city -- and he brought it up - he was excited at Mamdani -- he looked to be in his early 50s. So, personal conversations are a mixed bag -- and I have to adhere to this dictum: judgments
based on snippets of conversation may not reflect a person's
considered, complete, or public stance, leading to misrepresentation. NYC Retirees attack retirees who back Mamdani. I was about to get into the retiree battles in the UFT over the anti-Mamdani position Marianne Pizzitola has taken and the reaction to it, but let's wait until tomorrow or the next day -- but I will say, she has taken a risk in dipping too deep into divisive politics and even some her most loyal supporters are disturbed -- Did she fail to follow her own advice she gave to UFT retirees to stick to the issue? Well, in some ways she did and in some ways she did not. I may even dip into my changing views on Israel -- which reflects growing feelings in the Jewish community, 30 or more % going for Mamdani.
I will attempt to untangle it all tomorrow - or maybe never. Meanwhile check out these NYT articles: Who Should Be Mayor of New York City?The
Democratic Party and its liberal allies refuse to call for mass
mobilization and strikes — the only tools that can thwart Trump’s
emergent authoritarianism — fearing they too will be swept aside.
I spoke to Daniel this morning for almost 2 hours that he has to squeeze into one hour. His questions had me going deep, not only into the history -- I actually got up early this morning to visit the archives in my basement and discovered new information on the organizing efforts in the years before - and after. I have an engagement at 7 so can't listen but when I have a link I will elaborate further.
More Recent Articles
|
|
