So New York did a thing, a very stupid thing. They elected Mamdani as mayor. New York City will become more disastrous than it already is as a result.
In the aftermath of the election, talking heads on the Right, particularly older ones, have bemoaned and continue to bemoan the fact that our largest and most important city is now in the hands of a self-avowed socialist. Now, Mamdani’s socialism is not the primary concern with him; I mentioned what was—him being a symptom of decay in our national identity and culture—in my last piece. But many of these talking heads have gone directly to socialism, so let’s talk about socialism.
The typical line about the philosophy—“It doesn’t work; it’s never worked!”—has been frequently expressed. And, to cut them some slack, I understand why this is their natural response. They’re right. Socialism does not work, it has never worked, and it never will. But this response from older individuals on the Right is too logical.
Mamdani’s appeal was not and is not logical. When people vote for a socialist, it’s typically not due to an intense, logically thought-out ideological devotion, even though those of us actively paying attention to political and cultural issues have a tendency to ascribe that as being the reason why people have made this choice. Most people are not politicos like we are, so oftentimes, when people vote for a socialist, it’s due to the simple reason that they are struggling financially, and the socialist candidate has a plan to bring them out of financial burden. These people with financial struggles don’t logically think through how socialism will actually exacerbate their financial struggles; they don’t feel like they can afford to.
Ah! And there it is. In the broad realm of financial struggles, affordability was the aspect that made Mamdani immensely appealing to voters. This was especially the case for young voters. Case in point, NPR put out an article at the end of last month discussing how young Americans nationally are losing faith in the American Dream and the American system (chiefly capitalism in this economic context). Oh, and by the way, I try to use left-wing sources to support my argument even though I’m on the other side—just in case you’re wondering why I’m using an article from the propagandists over at NPR. Anyways, the election of Mamdani in New York City is just a microcosm of the larger national sentiment among young Americans. One section of the article that is particularly worth noting mentions how housing costs have risen faster than wages for about two decades (Treasury), the median age for a first-time homebuyer is now around 40 (National Association of Realtors), which is roughly ten or so years older than it was in the early ‘90s, millennials and Zoomers have more student (Pew, 09/24) and mortgage debt (Pew, 01/24) despite being on track to surpass older generations in educational attainment (Pew, 2020), and starting a family feels unaffordable to many, which has contributed to the fertility rate plummeting—yes, I’m willing to acknowledge that those of us with more traditional values have a moral obligation to have a family; our material situation isn’t what is supposed to dictate that decision, but I digress.
When you have a stew with these ingredients, people begin to feel hopeless. So when a socialist comes along with his sweet-talk about how he’s going to make things more affordable—even free in some cases—and how he’s going to, for all intents and purposes, “get the rich,” he becomes incredibly appealing, especially because the latter part of that sweet-talk appeals to people’s resentment. And when a person attains institutional power by exploiting people’s resentment, well, history shows us that that can be the beginning of some of the worst atrocities our species can commit. Now, I highly doubt that’s the road we’re going down here. However, it does show why socialism, and anything stemming from or related to Marxism, really, should be avoided, because it’s built on resentment.
But the fact that socialism is built on resentment does not mean that we can just shrug off financial struggles amongst our younger citizens. We need to acknowledge that that’s a problem. And then, once we’ve acknowledged that we have a problem, we can provide a message, one not built on resentment, but rather one of hope with grounding in plausible, realistic answers to our younger citizens’ financial ills. For example, I’m sure we can find ways to open up the housing industry. There are doubtless stupid regulations that can be cut. Tax cuts or breaks for construction companies are another strategy that I’ve heard tossed about that could help. Furthermore, it’d probably help if Gen X parents stopped telling their Zoomer children to follow the same path they did, because that’s part of what’s causing the problem. A lot of Zoomers are doing what their parents are telling them to do—go to college—because the Gen X parent believes that there’s magically going to be a job waiting for their Zoomer child just as there was when they graduated college.
There’s a slight problem, however. It’s 2025, not 1990. The path has changed because certain variables have changed it. We have the internet now. We have social media. We’ve had massive influxes of immigrants, many of whom are not even supposed to be here. Not to mention, we have, as the NPR article mentions, massive piles of student debt because a degree costs WAY more now than it did when a Zoomer’s parents were in college. Gen X parents: if your child is going to have to rack up debt to attend college, especially a substantial amount, you better make sure your child is getting a degree that will make it financially worth doing so because, if not, then going to college is not worth it. Help your teenager find a different avenue. I’ve heard trade school is quite a solid avenue. Plus, with that avenue, your child doesn’t have to worry about being replaced by AI, which isn’t necessarily the case with a college degree. Nobody knows exactly to what extent AI is going to impact what have been traditionally referred to as the “white-collar” industries, but to act like it’s not going to replace a noteworthy amount of jobs is pure delusion.
Logically ranting about the pitfalls of socialism will get us socialism. Can I guarantee it? No. But highly plausible? Absolutely. All of that logical ranting ignores, in this case, reality, but even if it didn’t, it also ignores voters’ feelings; yes, their feelings. I know we’re the side of “Facts don’t care about your feelings,” as the Ben Shapiro quote goes. But as the Michael Malice retort goes, “Feelings don’t care about your facts.” And when voters feel as though there’s not a light at the end of the tunnel, and your messaging consists of logical rantings against the other guy’s philosophy rather than answers to alleviate what they are feeling—which can come off as telling the voters to go fornicate themselves, by the way—well, they’re willing to go out and do what they just did in New York City.
And I’m just telling you that the national sentiment amongst our young people, the one I already mentioned above, leaves us ripe for what just happened in New York City to happen at the federal level. Sure, someone like Mamdani is too much of a nut on the social front to get elected nationally. It’s New York City after all. However, if young people still feel the way they do now, economically speaking, at some point in the near future, combined with the fact that we’ve seen a massive influx of immigrants over the course of this century, and then you get a left-wing socialist who is more reasonable on the social front, thereby breaking from his party, there is a strong chance we get socialism in this country.
So people on the Right need to stop the logical rantings and ravings about socialism and how it doesn’t work. They miss the point, and they’re falling on deaf ears.
I mean, I thought part of the goal of conservatives was to preserve something so that future generations could flourish. Well, the future generations aren’t flourishing. That leaves us with two obvious choices: the system needs to come down, which is the socialist option, or the system has changed, and society’s elders are failing in aiding the future generations to successfully navigate those changes. I believe in the American Dream, and I believe in the American system, so I prefer the latter option. So let’s choose a strategy that maximizes our chances of the country choosing option two. Let’s start providing sound answers as to how to help alleviate young Americans’ financial struggles. Let’s start focusing on helping young Americans navigate the changes in the system. That’s not only a much better political strategy, but it’s a better strategy for ensuring the long-term health of America.
Sources:
https://www.npr.org/2025/10/31/nx-s1-5590153/young-voters-american-dream-economy
Links for the section of the NPR article used:
https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-stories/rent-house-prices-and-demographics
https://www.nar.realtor/research-and-statistics/research-reports/highlights-from-the-profile-of-home-buyers-and-sellers
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/05/14/on-the-cusp-of-adulthood-and-facing-an-uncertain-future-what-we-know-about-gen-z-so-far/
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/09/18/facts-about-student-loans/
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2024/01/25/key-milestones-for-young-adults-today-versus-30-years-ago/