Warmth-of-Collectivism Humor

It’s time for the first humor column of 2026, and it will be part of my collection of memes, cartoons, and jokes that mock collectivism.

So it’s very appropriate that we’ll be focusing on Zohran Mamdani, New York City’s new mayor who openly extolled the supposed “warmth of collectivism” in his inaugural address.

This was superior, he claimed, when compared to “the frigidity of rugged individualism.”

Which led one clever person to point out that you can see the difference from outer space.

So I’ll start today’s Mamdani-themed humor with another comparison of rugged individualism and warm collectivism.

Some Mamdani humor focuses on whether residents have voted for economic suicide.

That’s the message of this cartoon.

And this meme as well.

And somebody created a meme similar to my Charlie Brown Award.

By the way, this Charlie Brown meme is eerily accurate, based on Mamdani’s platform when he ran for class Vice President in high school.

As usual, I’ve saved the best for last.

This meme returns to the comparison of rugged individualism and warm collectivism.

Very appropriate since Hitler’s National Socialists were a particularly nasty strain of collectivism.

P.S. A columnist for the New York Times tried to argue last September that Mamdani wasn’t really a socialist. That didn’t age well.

Read Full Post »

Zohran Mamdani, Part I: The “Caviar Communist” Openly Embraces Collectivism

I’m going to start today’s column by acknowledging a mistake. Two days ago, as part of my Best and Worst News of 2025, I didn’t include Zohran Mamdani’s election as Mayor of New York City because I viewed him only as “a theoretical threat.”

Yes, I knew he had a nutty agenda, but surely he couldn’t be worse than other leftist NYC Mayors, such as Bill de Blasio?

But I had to change my mind after seeing what he said as part of his inaugural speech yesterday. Like a good Marxist, he actually stated the “We will replace the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism.”

Your eyes are not deceiving you. He actually embraced the totalitarian notion of collectivism. Whether you call that communism or hard-core socialism, that’s insane.

But don’t believe me. Let’s see what people who grew up in the Soviet Union have to say. Here’s look at a tweet from Garry Kasparov, who was a chess champion from the communist era and obviously has familiarity with collectivist regimes.

Even the head of Russia’s sovereign wealth fund (and a Putin appointee), Krill Dmitriev, couldn’t resist tweeting that Mamdani doesn’t understand history.

Here’s a tweet that shows what collectivism delivers (described in greater detail here).

When I first read Atlas Shrugged in college, I remember thinking how the bad guys closely resembled real-life people.

Well, here’s a tweet from Professor Alex Tabarrok at George Mason University that makes the same point.

And we’ll close with a tweet from one of Justice Gorsuch’s former clerks.

If you want the details about the 100 million deaths caused by communism, click here.

P.S. I can’t resist sharing two additional tweets.

First, Mamdani supporters got a nice taste of what socialism actually delivers.

Second, you’ve probably heard the terms “limousine liberal” and “champagne socialist” to describe rich leftists.

That definitely applies to Mamdani, who is from a rich family.

As this tweet indicates, I think we need a new term like “caviar communist.”

I wonder if Mamdani’s wife is friends with Chavez’s daughter?

But I don’t wonder about the impact of Mamdani’s policies on domestic migration patterns. If he gets to impose even half of his agenda, New York City might beat Chicago to bankruptcy.

Read Full Post »

Whitewashing Zohran Mamdani’s Socialism at the New York Times

When I wrote about New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani a few months ago, here was my main takeaway.

Mamdani is an AOC-style hard-core leftist who wants to travel in the wrong direction as far and as fast as Javier Milei is traveling in the right direction.

When asked to elaborate, I sometimes dig into the archives and pull out my 2015 statism spectrum.

Looking at those options, my best guess is that he would position New York City somewhere between Mexico and China.

In other words, New York City would go downhill, perhaps turning into Caracas-on-the-Hudson or something like that.

Another option is to look at my 2×2 matrix from 2016, which I think does a better job of differentiating between different types of statism.

And that matrix does include Venezuela, which is quite appropriate since that’s my guess for what Mamdani’s agenda ultimately would produce.

But is he technically a socialist, i.e., someone who believes in government ownership, central planning, and price controls?

Based on his own words, the answer is yes.

But some people at the New York Times have a different perspective. According to a column by Jeffery Mays, Mamdani isn’t really a socialist.

I’m not joking. Here are some excerpts.

Mr. Mamdani…is a democratic socialist, which means his beliefs are similar to those of socialists but not exactly the same. …Here’s a breakdown of how socialism and democratic socialism work, and where Mr. Mamdani fits in. …Socialism is a doctrine that calls for public control of property and natural resources. …There are different types of socialism and different ideas about the extent of public ownership of property and whether those assets should be controlled via a centralized authority or if more decisions should be made at the local level. …Mr. Mamdani, a state assemblyman, has based his campaign on making New York City more affordable, vowing to make buses free and extending free child care, among other similar proposals. …Mr. Mamdani’s plan to pay for his proposals borrows from a traditional Democratic method: increase taxes on the rich. He would also increase the top corporate tax rate, but has proposed nothing remotely close to a socialist-like takeover of private companies.

So we’re supposed believe Mamdani’s agenda is “nothing remotely close” to socialism.

Yet the article notes that Mamdani openly identifies as a socialist.

The New York City D.S.A. describes itself as a branch of the national group, which says it is the “largest socialist organization” in the country. Mr. Mamdani is a member of both. He joined the New York City D.S.A. around 2017… Mr. Mamdani’s stature was such that he spoke at the national D.S.A. convention in 2023. …In the State Legislature, he was part of the D.S.A.’s eight-member “Socialists in Office” group.

So how can Mr. Mays claim that Mamdani is not a socialist and that his agenda is not socialism?

I think the answer is that Mays wants Mamdani to win and he’s trying to make him seems like a run-of-the-mill Democrat so that voters won’t be afraid to vote for him.

And why do I think Mays has that bias?

In part because the article is trying to whitewash Mamdani’s radical agenda.

Butt I also think these two sentences are a clear giveaway. Mays actually wants readers to believe that socialism is for “the benefit of all members of society” and that it means “treating people more equitably.”

The control of resources is then directed toward the benefit of all members of society. …The closest Mr. Mamdani gets to socialism is in his belief in treating people more equitably.

The first sentence is nonsense. Socialism has always produced misery. The only recipe that has ever generated mass prosperity is free enterprise.

Though I suppose the second sentence technically might be true since almost all people are equally poor under socialism. But somehow I don’t think that’s what Mr. Mays is trying to say in the article.

Besides, socialism only treats 99 percent of the population “equitably.” There’s always a narrow slice of socialist leaders who live like kings and queens.

P.S. Since Mamdani comes from a wealthy and privileged background, he would obviously be part of the elite, the kind of person who is called a “limousine liberal” in the United States and a “champagne socialist” in the United Kingdom.

Read Full Post »

Mamdani’s Suicide Note for New York City

Yesterday’s column mocked the the socialist mayoral candidate who won the Democratic primary in New York City.

As I noted, Zohran Mamdani is an AOC-style hard-core leftist who wants to travel in the wrong direction as far and as fast as Javier Milei is traveling in the right direction.

Several readers have asked me to elaborate.

What exactly is he proposing?

A report in the New York Times by Matthew Haag and Benjamin Oreskes summarizes his crazy views.

To see that I’m not exaggerating about his lunatic platform, here are the most relevant excerpts.

…much of Mr. Mamdani’s agenda relies in large measure on increasing revenue through taxes on businesses and the wealthy…Along with raising income taxes, he has pledged to shift the property tax burden “from the outer boroughs to more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods,” according to his campaign website. …Mr. Mamdani is proposing a new income tax of 2 percent on residents making more than a $1 million a year… He also wants the state to sign off on an increase of the top corporate tax rate to 11.5 percent, up from 7.25 percent now. …He wants to build 200,000 units of affordable housing and freeze rent on the city’s nearly one million rent-stabilized apartments. …Mr. Mamdani says the city should “implement free child care for every New Yorker aged 6 weeks to 5 years.” …his aides estimate its cost at between $5 billion and $8 billion. …New York City’s bus system serves more than 1.1 million riders every day. Mr. Mamdani wants to make their trips free. …Mr. Mamdani has proposed creating five city-owned grocery stores… Mr. Mamdani wants to nearly double the minimum wage to $30 per hour by 2030.

Wow. That’s not an economic platform. That’s a suicide note for New York City.

The only silver lining to this dark cloud is that many of his proposals would require approval from the state government.

That may not happen. Yes, the left controls the state government, but there is a difference between conventional leftists and crazy leftists.

So i hope and suspect that some of Mamdani’s ideas, such as a higher state corporate tax, may never happen.

But one thing that probably will happen is that Mamdani’s election (assuming he wins in November) will hasten the already-existing exodus of successful people from New York City.

Cameron Henderson of the U.K.-based Telegraph has a column discussing how Mamdani’s intended victims are planning to escape.

New York is bracing for an “exodus of billionaires” after the Democrats nominated a staunch socialist as their candidate for mayor. …The primary result has sparked panic among New York’s ultra-rich, with luxury real estate agents inundated with calls from clients looking to relocate or freeze plans to move their businesses to Manhattan. One high-end broker described Mr Mamdani’s victory as the “worst thing for the housing market since 9/11”, while another called it the “nail in the coffin” for New York. …“It’s the most devastating thing (to our industry) since 9/11,” he added. “We are going to have the biggest exodus of New Yorkers since Covid – except this time, they’re not going to come back.” …As New York’s top one per cent look to leave the city, low-tax states such as Florida, which does not levy income tax, are set to become “big winners”… According to the city’s independent budget office, one per cent of households pay 40 per cent of city income taxes…said Mr Kraut…“If those companies and ultra net worth individuals choose to leave the city, your tax base goes bye bye.”

From a moral perspective, I applaud when intended victims escape predatory politicians.

But let’s focus on a very practical issue, which is what happens when some (maybe many) of the people paying for government decide it’s not worth it any more.

If there’s even a small shift in the number of rich taxpayers, New York (both city and state) will be in deep trouble.

Let’s close with this tweet from Daniel di Martino. As you can see, Mamdani is a true-believing genuine socialist.

Government ownership of the “means of production” is textbook socialism.

The fact that it always leads to failure apparently doesn’t matter to people like Mamdani.

Read Full Post »