Zohran Mamdani has admitted listing his race as “black” on a college admission form. He is not black — he is ethnically South Asian since, by his own admission, his ancestors all came from India. It is impossible to know what went through his head when Mamdani lied on his Columbia University admission form, but the most obvious reason for doing so would have been to give himself an advantage over other applicants. If that was the case, it was not just lying; it was cheating.
Lying on a college admission form is not a criminal offense, but most would say it is unethical. It does not reflect the sort of integrity that one would expect in the mayor of America’s largest city. I would say it’s not at all different from what Elizabeth Warren (“Pocahontas”) did in representing herself as a Native American.
In the academic world, at least before the recent Supreme Court ruling striking down affirmative action in admissions, a great deal of preference was given to minority candidates, and surely Mamdani would have known that. His excuses so far have been remarkably lame: Since he was born in Uganda, he was “sort of” black, and he wanted to “fully represent” himself. Or another: There was “no place on the form” to list himself as “born in Africa” but not African, but “Asian, so he checked “black” and “Asian.” I think most people would say this was disingenuous. It seems he was taking advantage.
If that’s the case, how else has Mamdani “taken advantage” since graduating from Bowdoin College (he did not attend Columbia, despite his “black” race). He has never referred to himself as black on the campaign trail, but he has boasted that he is a Muslim and would be the first South Asian to become mayor of a major U.S. city. As a result, he received heavy support from both groups. He has also conducted a campaign that I would call disingenuous, promising a full array of free benefits to voters that by law either he cannot provide or that he cannot pay for.
Mamdani seems to misrepresent himself in other ways. Is he a “democratic socialist,” like Bernie Sanders, or a communist, as President Trump called him? Why does he refuse to admit that in many, respects he may be a communist? He has talked about seizing the means of production from capitalists and distributing it to workers, a classic communist line. He promises state-run grocery stores, subsidized housing, free transportation, and a host of other “free” benefits, as if these benefits would not have to be paid for by someone — and there again, his communist leanings are showing. He would steal from the rich to pay for his programs.
It may also be that, behind his smile and charm, there lurks a totalitarian, but Mamdani is not going to admit it. Democratic socialists are always “democratic” as long as they are winning; when they become less popular, as Hugo Chávez and then Nicolás Maduro did in Venezuela, they rig the elections so there is no more democracy.
Then there is Israel. Once again, Mamdani has parsed his words in ways that many would call dishonest. Mamdani claims that he is not “antisemitic” (even former Hillary Clinton aide Al Mottler claims that he is) but admits that he is “anti-Zionist” and refuses to condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada.” Although few would call him “pro-Israel,” it seems that Mamdani wants to appear friendly to Jews in the presence of Jews, friendly to Muslims in the presence of Muslims, and friendly to intifada terrorists in the presence of intifada terrorists. In other words, he is an opportunist.
But he is not “just another politician.” He has refused to sign petitions condemning the Holocaust and affirming Israel’s right to exist. Refusing to condemn October 7 immediately after the attack is not just disingenuous; it is evil, as is refusing to condemn the Holocaust. There is no comparison between lying on a college application and refusing to condemn “globalize the intifada.” “From the river to the sea” has no place in American politics, and anyone who attempts to kowtow to such an opinion has no place running for mayor of NYC.
Jewish politicians who have expressed support or praise for Mamdani, as have Rep. Jerry Nadler and Sen. Chuck Schumer, are playing with fire. The general opinion seems to be that Mamdani will win anyway, so Jewish residents of New York need to work with him so as to preserve their community’s security. Anyone who has read Hannah Arendt’s Eichmann in Jerusalem knows how dangerous this opinion is. As Arendt documented (and she was widely criticized for doing so), there were many Jews in positions of authority who facilitated the Nazi selection and elimination of Jewish people. It was not just Germans like Eichmann who carried out Hitler’s orders. Jewish leaders in New York need to be uncompromising in their support of the State of Israel and of the Jewish population everywhere.
It is a lie, pure and simple, to represent oneself as black when one is not. It is dishonest to promise a host of benefits, from state-run groceries to subsidized housing, when one cannot deliver. It is disingenuous to speak of oneself as a “friend to Jews” when one is not.
But it is far worse to refuse to condemn the actions of Hamas and of the intifada. It is one thing and not so very uncommon to be a political opportunist. It is quite another to appear to accept terrorism, antisemitism, and violence, including violence again Jewish students on U.S. campuses. Religious freedom is a fundamental right in the U.S., and it cannot be abridged, even by a politician that thinks he can have it both ways. If Mamdani fails to condemn the violence of Hamas, condemn the intifada, condemn the Holocaust, and condemn violence against Jews everywhere, he should withdraw from the mayoral race immediately.
Jeffrey Folks is the author of many books and articles on American culture including Heartland of the Imagination (2011).
Image: Zohran Mamdani. Credit: Bingjiefu He via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0.
