This is not new and we heave discussed this at length, which is why im locking this thread.
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2025
48 points (94.4% liked)
electoralism
22206 readers
29 users here now
Welcome to c/electoralism! politics isn't just about voting or running for office, but this community is.
Please read the Chapo Code of Conduct and remember...we're all comrades here.
Shitposting in other comms please!
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
July 15, 2025
OK, has he said anything recently that shows a different posture?
There’s literal evidence of him refuting the condemnation of ‘globalize the intifada’
While this is a NyCrimes claim from July that he will ‘discourage’ the use of the phrase.
What’s actually going on on this site? Nearly a 100% of the criticisms of this guy on here stem from claims by Zionists and insane libs about what he has said, it’s never anything he has actually said.
When did he say globalize the intifada?
Fixed
Was the discussion of this "news" not sufficient for you when it actually happened? Or when it was brought up over and over and over again here as if it were new such that you need to rehash it again? Respectfully, this is straight-up wrecker behavior.
Aside from the promise to arrest Netanyahu if he steps foot in New York?
Why are we posting old stuff?
OP is just doing drive-bys and has some fixation on mamdani stories we all talked about at length when they were fresh.
mamdani certainly deserves criticism but low-effort bait is just tiresome
For the love of God, please stop posting old Mamdani quotes daily
Liberal zionist.
The west has long history of westerners who are lauded as progressive because they are supposedly against said bad thing outside their borders but denigrate the people actually fighting said bad thing. These westerners gain support because they promise to distribute the loot of imperialism more equitably but will effectively do zilch against said imperialism.
One can rationalise away what Mamdani said above but given the context of everything else he said it is clear what this is: liberal zionism. If you’re against zionism but you admonish the people on the ground fighting said zionism, especially during a genocide, then you’re not against zionism.
Liberalism has a special skill to isolate anything outside of its wider context and resort to non-scientific essentialism; dialectical materialism does not tolerate such nonsense, it is best to learn this superpower in this cruel world.
So let me see if I understand: You're going to uncritically accept the NYT's framing of a second hand account of what Zohran Mamdani said to a bunch of New York elites, where these journalists didn't even trust themselves to use quotes when describing what he said but rather just quoting individual words taken out of context from again, possibly unreliable sources.
In fact the only partial quote more than single words in the entire article from him on the subject is this:
Just two weeks ago, shortly after his primary victory, Mr. Mamdani said in an interview on “Meet the Press” that the term was “not language that I use” but that “I don’t believe that the role of the mayor is to police speech.”
This is deeply unserious posting from you and lacking any critical thought, or just completely dishonest.
Seeing "globalize the intifada" as a call against Jewish people implies conflating jewishness and Zionism which is antisemitic
The existence of non-whites has been seen as a call to violence against the Herrenvolk, unfortunately I will have to round them all up
Edit: sorry for the overly crass comment but this liberal zionist shit pisses me off so much 
Why not just translate the whole thing to English? No reasonable person will have a negative reaction to "globalize the resistance". Most Americans associate the word "intifada" with the suicide bombing tactics of the second intifada, it's not a betrayal of Palestine to recognize the cultural context of Americans that creates a negative connotation to that word, even if fully educated comrades recognize the actual meaning of the term "intifada" is very different. If Mamdani's stance is purely the discouragement of the specific wording, without being opposed to the true meaning of the phrase itself, then this stance is perfectly acceptable. Based on the totality of his statements on Zionism and the genocide, I believe this to be the case.
I'm spitballing about the title to an article I just saw a jpeg of, so I'm no expert (AND IMPORTANTLY BLISSFULLY UNAWARE OF THE MEANING OF INTIFADA). I imagine if I rose to prominence doing Brazilian Jiu Jitsu and all around me nerds are always chanting "heel hook their legs off!" I'd eventually make a statement like he did. They'd be all "Oh, WDYMP prefers the IBJJF's watered down ruleset..." but maybe the slogan reflects poorly on the way I see the sport. "Twist their legs off" wouldn't stop me from being embarrassed by nerds.
If he does something like this he might see his goal as mayor to be more focused and less general. He really wants to make good on his promise of affordability and if he himself generalized his message it might muddy the waters, open him to criticism, and risk getting nothing done. He's also a demsucc so I could just as easily be wrong.
Unpopular opinion: He's right.
If we want socialism to be taken seriously in the US we need to win people over. We do that by speaking to them in their terms and showing them how it can better their material conditions. To most americans "globalize the intafada" at best means nothing and at worst sounds scary and foreign. Insisting on circlejerking over ingroup terminology is only going to alienate people. Saying "globalize the intafada" will not mean anything to most people in the US, but saying "We need to come together as a global community to stop the slaughter of innocent civilians in Palestine" will.
One of the roles of electeds is to act as public educators - teach people why we must globalize the intifada. They have a platform and a duty to use it to raise the consciousness of workers.
Yes, educating people should be one of his goals. But I would say his more important goal should be actually globalizing the intifada. If he has to use different phrasing in the moment to more effectively work towards that then he should. That is especially true when this article was first written because he was still trying to win the election. Spouting off ingroup terminology doesn't win elections.
I would much rather have him say things wrongly and acheive his actual goals than have him spend his entire term in office getting blocked due to insisting on specific phrasing and spending all his time trying to educate people around that phrasing.
If he has to use different phrasing in the moment to more effectively work towards that then he should.
This is how you win the 
Every single person that tells you this will achieve absolutely fucking nothing as they will do nothing but triangulate themselves further and further rightwards to advance their career under the excuse that one day, in the future, it will eventually be worth it when they actually do something to advance our cause. That day will never come, they will just moderate themselves more and more and more to further their position. There will always be a little more adulting in the room needed to further their position just a little bit more to get more power.
It's just careerist behaviour. Such people become absorbed by the system.
We can't let our enemies choose our phrasing for us.
It’s just an Arabic word for resistance and Americans are racist as shit, it’s not hard to understand. Can’t really solve racism before doing anything
That's where his role comes in as a public educator, make it clear that the attacks against him are just racism.
Instead he just catered to racism.
One of the roles of electeds is to act as public educators - teach people why we must globalize the intifada. They have a platform and a duty to use it to raise the consciousness of workers.
^This. Even if one doesn't know what a vanguard means.
Yeah bro the "influential business owners" totally have our backs and are correct!
You have no class consciousness. These people are literally your enemy and absolutely nothing they say is in your interests. Anything these fucking people don't like is in your interests.
Start treating class war like an actual war or you're going to keep making the mistake of agreeing with the words of your enemy.
Start treating class war like an actual war or you're going to keep making the mistake of agreeing with the words of your enemy.
The level of class consciousness in this country might actually be lower than that of pre October revolution Russia. Bolshevism didn’t arise out of thin air. It took advantage of the working class coalitions and unions already in pace. Lenin himself was influenced by Germany’s SPD. Meanwhile, in this country, a succdem even getting elected to a city office is grounds for excommunication. I’m not saying we should rely on succdems at all but the rhetoric on this site regarding this guy is Ultra shit
You have no class consciousness.
Let’s chill out for a sec.
If a racist says something that is detrimental to poc and someone is like "Yeah this is a good point actually" I'm going to come down on them for having absolutely no consciousness of racial issues. If a classist says something that is detrimental to the working class and someone is like "Yeah this is a good point actually" they deserve to be scolded for it just the same as someone deserves to be scolded for it on racial issues.
This shit is the classism equivalent of MLK's white moderate. Calling for exactly the same thing, "calm down", "wait a little longer", "do it for strategic reasons", "in the future it will be better". No. These calls for moderacy are totally bullshit. They're the exact same bullshit that people do in racial issues but transferred to class issues instead.
America had a long history of racial struggle before MLK made that statement. Who has been the biggest vanguard for proletarian revolution in US history? Eugene V Debs? Let’s get real here
It depends on what one means by "socialism" and which material interests one is trying to win over.
"We need to come together as a global community to stop the slaughter of innocent civilians in Palestine” will."
So you think announcing that we should start arming the palestinian resistance fighters will be less controversial?
If he was in the position to say that, he could instead argue to dearm Israel, which would be more beneficial than arming Palestinians.
I would argue it's easier to arm the resistance fighters than to de-arm Israel, and that it is more beneficial to the palestinians.
And from a negotiating tactic in liberal political theatre you don't meet them in their court; you should take a more extreme position than what you will concede. So if Mamdani is already doing what he is doing now then it doesn't bode well for the future.
As Kwame Ture suggests non-violence only works if the oppressor has a conscience. And history has shown this to be right, time and time again.
Mamdani gives off the impression he said "globalise the intifada" for the political vibes, which makes it that much more disgusting.
I would argue it's easier to arm the resistance fighters than to de-arm Israel
Like... how do Americans start arming the resistance? Through what port? With what shipping company? While the FBI is... what, on lunch break?
The same way they are currently arming Israel; through Palestine.
If one thinks saving palestinians is unrealistic then their genocide should not be used as a poltical cover to win votes.
We aren't talking about random individuals, we are talking about a person who used sympathy against a genocide to win votes in a major (if not one of the most famous) western city and people are rightly getting pissed off at Bernie 3.0 repeated so-called capitulations.
If the whole point is just to spread the wealth exploited from imperialism more equitably and not do anything meanful about said exploitation, then he's no better than the monsters before him.
The same way they are currently arming Israel
That's only possible if they can topple the government
That’s only possible if they can topple the government
Yes and you do that by arming the resistance. One could learn from the folks from every successful campaign against western imperialism and not be beholden to western exceptionalism.
So organise. If this wasn't just political theatre then he should organise, building on the existing campaigns to move in the direction of pressure, and be clear about what needs to be done. He should use his public voice to teach and inform the public, and not resort to tailism.
If this wasn't just political theatre that is.
Careful, you're gonna undermine the larp
I mean, is anyone surprised by this? He's about as far "left" as any politician would be allowed to win.