The ICE gestapo is going to terrorize NYC no matter who’s mayor.

Part of the indignity of the Adams administration has been the NYPD doing a lot of the dirty work. In a city with a $5.8B budget (by comparison, the entire North Korean military apparatus runs on $4B/year adjusted) that's an enormous force multiplier. Mamdani's pledged to pull the plug on this relationship in his first 100 days. And that's going to provoke an ugly backlash without a doubt, both inside the NYPD and from DC.

The struggle doesn’t end on election day!

Hard truths. Far better to have a guy like Mamdani at the wheel than a Kapo like Cuomo or Adams.

Well I'm hoping that what Mamdani can prove to the democratic party is that charismatic young leaders with progressive ideas are the way forward. Maybe then a certain monitor brand can get the 2028 presidential election nomination.

Part of me still wants to live and work in the US, NYC in particular. Ain't gonna happen in this current state of things though. First you guys need a new president, then a huge lack of software engineers and then the country would be ready to receive me lol

But even that aside - some European conservative parties are just mirroring the republican party. I think if they lose power, our conservatives will also lose confidence and pull a bit to the left.

Sometimes bringing people hope is more important than whether you get everything done or even just half. When people have hope, more progressive politicians may get their chances.

I mean, he's a mayor---not city council. People ascribe far too much power to the executive branch to get things done as opposed to the legislative branch which holds all the actual power in a representative democracy

You raise valid points, yet I think we’re talking about different kinds of Socialism in a way. Your form of socialism here is like a Cold War era form of the ism. That form is often thought of as something which needs be imposed in a top-down fashion unto society — an inherently vulnerable approach. Look to history, a lot of 20th-century “socialisms” were really authoritarian states using socialist language to justify centralized control, and they did often end up as new dictatorships.

I think what I am aiming for, though, is not socialism as a bridge from dictatorship to democracy, but as a result of capitalism evolving beyond its own contradictions. More like democratic socialism: cooperative ownership, strong social infrastructure, but still open markets and innovation. It’s less about revolution or replacement, and more about integration. A phase where capitalist systems start to internalize social equity and worker participation as competitive advantages rather than ideological opposites. The socialism Id advocate for can (and maybe should) rise organically from the bottom up.

There's a 3rd type of socialism that was more rarely spoken of in the 60's and 70's, because it didn't have the drawbacks of centralized soviet style communism and therefor was more difficult to demonize: Anarchism. This ideology was successfully implemented for a few years in parts of Spain during their civil war, and its success in creating a non-hierarchical decentralized and free society even attracted George Orwell to visit it, and join their cause to fight for what they were building.

It was eventually crushed by both fascists and communists, as both sides were terrified of that concept spreading. If we're able to implement it again someday, possibly in a spot where it would be much harder to crush militarily, then it would be a genie impossible to put back in the bottle, as it would be so self-evident in how superior of a way of life it provides to everyone, without the downsides of a centralized dictator.