The cameras panned across the crowd at Zohran Mamdani’s victory celebration — the newly elected mayor of New York City, surrounded by socialist activists, digital influencers, and the self-congratulating left. It was meant to be a night of triumph for the “movement.” But what stood out for those watching was not unity, or even politics. It was who was cheering.
Standing shoulder to shoulder, laughing and hugging, were Jamaal Bowman, Hasan Piker, and Zeteo’s Mehdi Hasan — three men whose names have become synonymous with the moral collapse that followed the Hamas atrocities of October 7.
Zeteo’s Mehdi Hasan at the Mamdani victory party with Hasan Piker and Jamaal Bowman. (start at 52:00)
Bowman, the disgraced former congressman, made his name shouting on New York’s streets that Israeli women were not raped on October 7 — that the accounts of mass sexual violence by Hamas terrorists were fabricated. He wasn’t a lone crank in an internet comment section; he was a member of Congress using his platform to publicly deny the humanity of Jewish victims in the streets of his district.
Hasan Piker, meanwhile, mocked the entire subject on his Twitch stream, telling his millions of followers that he didn’t care if the women on October 7 were raped. That flippant cruelty — that casual dismissal of atrocity — has become a feature, not a bug, of a corrupted culture that cloaks moral degeneracy in “anti-imperialist” rhetoric. His anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric had become so toxic, that Rep. Ritchie Torres, a Latin-Black gay Congressman, wrote a letter on October 29, 2024 to the CEO of Twitch to have Piker removed.
And then there was Mehdi Hasan, who publicly argued that early reports of “mass rape” on October 7 were overstated and politicized, arguing that the allegations had been “weaponized by supporters of Israel.” At Mamdani’s party, he stood smiling with Bowman and hugging Piker as the pain of Jews was being amplified and normalized.
And celebrated.
The spectacle was a black mirror of a broken city — a city that once prided itself on tolerance and moral clarity now relishing Jewish trauma.
New Yorkers didn’t just elect a socialist. They elected a symbol of moral inversion — a man whose supporters include those who laughed at, ignored, or explained away the rape and murder of innocents.
When the applause dies down and the speeches fade, one question will remain for the city that crowned Mamdani: What kind of people celebrate with rape deniers and those that revel in the pain of the most persecuted minority-minority?
Google employs roughly 2,000 people in Israel, predominantly in offices in Tel Aviv and Haifa. The technology giant has hired teams in research & development, and purchased several Israeli companies including Waze and Wiz for billions of dollars to establish a large footprint.
And many of the company’s American employees don’t like it.
Hundreds of Google employees held protests about the company’s ties to Israel. Google fired around 50 of them in 2024 over their protests regarding “Project Nimbus,” a $1.2 billion contract signed in 2021 for Google and Amazon to provide the Israeli government with cloud computing and artificial intelligence services.
The disgruntled employees may now be fighting a more subtle fight.
To use Google’s calendar function, one is left with some odd choices to find the time zone in Israel. Rather than showcasing capital and major cities like Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and Haifa – cities where Google has a presence – the company shows time zones for Gaza and Hebron.
It’s both insane and stupid. And a reminder of the subtle Israel and Jewish erasure that is happening by radical technology employees under everyone’s noses.
ACTION ITEM
Complain to Google and have them feature main Israeli cities in their calendars.
It took New York City barely a decade to move from Michael Bloomberg (mayor 2002-2014) to Zohran Mamdani — from a billionaire moderate who built a global business to an anti-capitalist socialist who’s never built anything.
Mike Bloomberg winning third term as NYC mayor
Bloomberg personified competence, merit, and modernity. He was a technocrat with a work ethic forged in markets — the quintessential New Yorker who believed that numbers mattered, that data and pragmatism could solve problems, and that capitalism, however imperfect, was the engine that kept the city alive.
Mamdani is the inversion of that story. He’s the smiling avatar of grievance politics — a man who’s never signed a paycheck, raised capital, or met a payroll, yet rails against the very system that feeds the city’s workers. He doesn’t want to grow the pie; he wants to break the plate.
So what happened to New York? How did a city that once celebrated builders and innovators — from bankers to artists, from garment manufacturers to tech founders — turn to someone who blames success itself for society’s ills?
Did New Yorkers Change — or Did the World?
Some say it was Donald Trump — the Queens developer turned president — who poisoned the well. For many New Yorkers, capitalism’s swagger became indistinguishable from his brashness. “Moderate” began to sound like “complicit.” Every problem was blamed on “the system,” and every system was condemned as oppressive.
Others blame social media, the great amplifier of outrage. The algorithms rewarded passion over proof, hashtags over homework. The loudest became the leaders, and anger became authenticity. The more you despised the system, the more followers you gained.
Still others point to federal polarization — a country at war with itself. Washington became tribal, and so did New York. To be anti-Republican meant embracing anything that wasn’t Republican, even if it was radical.
The Fall of the Striver Ideal
Bloomberg embodied a uniquely American, and particularly Jewish, story — the son of immigrants who rose by grinding harder, thinking smarter, and building bigger. For generations, that was the city’s moral code: earn it.
Mamdani represents something new — or perhaps something lost. He is not the striver, but the symbol. The story isn’t one of building, but belonging. It’s politics as identity and resentment rather than responsibility and results.
When a city stops admiring those who build and starts rewarding those who only protest, decline is not far behind.
A Mirror, Not a Moment
New York’s journey from Bloomberg to Mamdani isn’t just a change in politics — it’s a cultural inversion. The Jewish billionaire who built an empire has been replaced by a Ugandan Muslim who campaigns against empires. The technocrat gave way to the ideologue. The achiever to the accuser.
The city once responded to horrible radical Islamic terrorism in downtown Manhattan by electing a proven builder to remake the city. Now the city has responded to that vile terrorism in southern Israel by rallying behind a novice who vilified the victims.
It’s tempting to say the city changed. But perhaps it merely revealed what it had become: a place where envy now outshouts excellence, and where tearing down is easier than building up.
Frank Sinatra sang the city’s theme song “New York, New York,” that “if I can make it there, I’ll make it anywhere.” The city was a mark of excellence and competence. To win in New York City was the proving ground to anywhere and everywhere.
Does that now mean that grievance is the current marker of greatness in America? That radicalism and revolutionaries are the vanguard? Anti-capitalist socialism will come for cities around the United States?
The tragedy isn’t only that the city chose Mamdani. It’s that so many think it’s progress.
The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) recently issued yet another condemnation of Israel — this time for considering the death penalty for terrorists who murder Israelis. The outrage was immediate and performative. For one, it claimed that the proposed law was “racist” and being solely for “Palestinian detainees,” as opposed to people who murder. It further argued that Arabs who slaughter Jews should simply be treated as “Prisoners of War,” erasing any and all lines between soldiers and civilians and thereby condemning coexistence.
Wafa report on OIC condemning Israel for considering death penalty for Palestinian “detainees”
Here’s another uncomfortable truth: more than half of the OIC’s 57 member states have the death penalty — and not just for murder.
In Saudi Arabia, people are executed for drug trafficking, sorcery, and “crimes against God.” In Iran, the gallows await not only murderers, but those guilty of “corruption on earth” — a charge so elastic it includes political dissent, homosexuality, and apostasy. In Pakistan, blasphemy can mean death. In Mauritania and Sudan, apostasy itself is a capital crime. In Nigeria, men have been sentenced to death under Sharia courts for same-sex relations.
Yet these same governments now gather in moral indignation because Israel — a democracy under relentless terrorist attack — dares to debate capital punishment for those who slit the throats of families in their beds.
The hypocrisy is staggering.
The OIC has nothing to say when Hamas executes Palestinians in Gaza’s public squares for “collaboration.” It looks away when Iran hangs protesters from cranes, or when Afghanistan’s Taliban conduct public stonings. But when Jews, after burying their children, consider the ultimate penalty for their killers, suddenly the OIC finds its moral voice.
If morality were truly the concern, the OIC would start at home. It would demand an end to hangings for prayer and firing squads for love. But this is theater. Raw antisemitism redressed in sanctimony.
Israel’s debate over the death penalty is about justice for the innocent. The OIC’s silence over its members’ executions is about control of the obedient.
And that’s the dividing line between civilizations: one values life enough to punish those who destroy it; the other kills in the name of piety and calls it peace.
In October 2025, the Baháʼí Gardens in Haifa Israel shimmered under evening lights as thousands strolled the terraces surrounding the golden Shrine of the Báb. The event, “Terraces by Night,” invited everyone — Israelis, tourists, diplomats, Muslims, Christians, Jews — to share in quiet wonder. It was a celebration of beauty and peace, the essence of a faith that teaches the unity of mankind.
“The Bahá’í Gardens and the Shrine located in them are a religious and cultural asset of the highest order for Haifa and the State of Israel, and their spectacular beauty is an extraordinary global phenomenon. The connection between the city of Haifa and the Bahá’í Faith and the gardens is a unique bond of brotherhood and connection, because Haifa is a symbol of shared life.”
– Haifa Mayor Yona Yahav
That same faith is banned or persecuted across much of the Middle East. In Iran, where the Baháʼí Faith began, believers are barred from universities, their cemeteries desecrated, their homes seized. In Yemen, the Houthi regime has deported Baháʼís and outlawed their assemblies. In Qatar, a country that funds global propaganda about human rights, Baháʼís have been detained and denied employment. The list goes on: Christians face church burnings in Iraq and Egypt; Yazidis were enslaved by ISIS; Jews are long gone from the Arab world that once housed thriving communities.
The pattern is unmistakable — a region where religion is invoked constantly, yet religious freedom barely exists. Theocratic and authoritarian regimes claim divine legitimacy while erasing those who believe differently. Hatred of Jews may be the most visible strain, but the intolerance runs deeper: a rejection of pluralism itself.
Against that backdrop, Israel stands as an anomaly. The Baháʼí World Centre — the faith’s spiritual heart — sits on Mount Carmel, Haifa, Israel by choice, not exile. Baháʼís are forbidden by their own laws to proselytize in Israel, yet they flourish there. Muslims pray in mosques, Christians ring church bells, Druze maintain their shrines. It is imperfect coexistence, but coexistence nonetheless — a rare reality in a region where diversity elsewhere draws death sentences. Israel is the only country in the world where the religious majority does not make up the majority of annual tourists (Christians make up more than 50% of tourists to Israel each year).
Various pilgrims file in through the Jaffa Gate in the Old City of Jerusalem in April 2017 (photo: First One Through)
Even the United Nations, which rarely misses a chance to criticize Israel, cannot ignore this hypocrisy. In December 2024, it condemned Iran stating the “dramatic rise in persecution against Baha’i women is an alarming escalation.” Yet it has remained silent on Qatar, whose wealth buys global silence — from universities, media, and even diplomats who recite the language of tolerance while pocketing the proceeds of repression.
The Baháʼí Faith preaches that humanity is one family. In Haifa, that message is literal — thousands of visitors walking through open gates, cared for by volunteers of every background. It’s a vision of what the Middle East could be if faith were not used as a weapon.
The Baháʼís open their gardens in Israel while their co-religionists suffer in silence around the Muslim Middle East. They celebrate while others cower. And they do it in the one nation in the region where the doors of worship remain open for those willing to coexist peacefully.
Much of the attention on the Balfour Declaration—issued on November 2, 1917—focuses on the United Kingdom’s pledge to “facilitate” “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” Israel-haters rage at this clause, claiming that Jews had no historical connection to their ancestral homeland and that Britain had no right to “hand over” immigration rights from local Arabs to Jews.
Balfour Declaration
On the anniversary of the Declaration in 1943, Heinrich Himmler of Nazi Germany sent a telegram to the “Grand Mufti” of Jerusalem that Nazis and Arabs had the same enemies – Jewish invaders. In 2016, the President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas demanded an apology and reparations from Britain for issuing the Balfour Declaration, having repeatedly failed to destroy the Jewish State.
Telegram from Heinrich Himmler to Amin al-Husseini on November 2, 1943
But there’s another part of that same document that antisemites also detest. The closing line reads:
“…nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”
That final clause—protecting Jews’ rights around the world—is precisely what modern antisemitic movements are trying to undermine. Groups like Within Our Lifetime, CAIR, and the Democratic Socialists of America openly campaign to dismantle what they deride as “Jewish power” in America.
They smear Jews as self-serving “capitalists,” accuse them of exploiting “Black and Brown bodies” for profit (as Rep. Rashida Tlaib has said), and seek to push Jews to the margins of public life—all because Jews affirm that the land of Israel is their homeland.
A century after the Balfour Declaration, its promise remains under attack—not only in the Jewish homeland but wherever Jews dare to live proud and free.
Obama’s warning has become the Democratic nightmare in New York City
When Barack Obama commented in 2016 that Democrats were seen as “coastal, liberal, latte-sipping, politically correct, out-of-touch folks,” it was a wink to the party’s reputation — cultured, ironic, and comfortably detached. He meant it as a warning. But nine years later, the call about paying attention to Middle America has become prophecy about the edges. The latte-sippers have soured and radicalized on the coasts.
In New York City, the same college-educated progressives who once debated justice over cold brew now chant “Globalize the Intifada.” State Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, a proud member of the Democratic Socialists of America, leads the charge. What began as a movement which could generously be described as advocating inclusion and equity has evolved into a campaign to dismantle the American order itself. Mamdani and his allies call for the end of “empire” — by which they mean capitalism, policing, private property, and even the current structure of education and governance.
Obama’s gentle caricature of the latte class — earnest but insulated — has given way to something angrier and openly revolutionary. The Democratic Socialists’ worldview is not about reforming the system; it’s about replacing it. They seek a complete redistribution of wealth and power — not by persuasion, but by restructuring society’s foundations. Police are rebranded as “colonial enforcers.” Public schools become “sites of decolonization.” Private ownership itself is treated as moral corruption. It demands a “new economic order,” “new international solidarity,” “new moral vision,” “new global governance,” “new global organizations,” and a “new political era.”
This is not the politics of compassion, but of confrontation. The privileged class that once signaled virtue with hashtags and slogans now preaches a theology of resentment. They speak of liberation but demand obedience; they denounce power while pursuing it ruthlessly through intimidation and ideology. In the name of justice, they aim to burn down the very structures that made justice possible.
Nowhere is this more visible than in the 2025 New York City mayoral race, where Mamdani and the DSA have moved from campus protests to the ballot box. Their platform is sweeping: defund and “reimagine” the police, end merit-based education, socialize housing, and impose vast new public ownership schemes. It is a manifesto for the redistribution not just of wealth, but of control — from elected institutions to activist networks.
The symbolism is staggering. The city that once embodied liberal ambition — the energy of Wall Street, the art of Broadway, the immigrant striving that defined America — now flirts with an ideology that condemns its own success. From Columbia’s lecture halls to Brooklyn’s activist collectives, the heirs of Obama’s “latte-sipping liberals” now view the American dream as a capitalist fraud.
If Mamdani’s movement captures City Hall, it won’t just transform New York’s politics; it will mark the moment when the Democratic Party’s indulgence of its radical wing becomes surrender. The centrism of Obama and Clinton — built on pragmatism and incremental reform — is being replaced by the revolutionary certainties of those who see compromise as corruption.
Obama once teased his party for sipping lattes on the coasts, detached from ordinary life. Today, those same hands are clenched into fists. The mugs are gone, replaced by megaphones and manifestos. The “latte-sippers” have become the street revolutionaries — no longer content to mock the system, but determined to overthrow it.
As New York teeters between order and upheaval, the rest of the country would do well to take heed — and look right.
ACTION ITEMS
Register as a Democrat – regardless of your politics – in deeply blue cities and towns
Vote – and get out the vote – in the Democratic primaries for moderate candidates. Do not let the DSA take over your town
Vote Republican in the general November election. Keep your city and town from one party rule
Enlist popular moderate politicians to run who will keep the race between two individuals – extremists win in elections with numerous candidates
Local grassroots organization is key. It starts now, not weeks before elections
The first words God ever spoke to the first Jew were not of comfort, but command:
“Go forth from your country, from your birthplace, and from your father’s house, to the land that I will show you.” (Genesis 12:1)
Abraham was told to leave everything that gave him safety — his home, his family, his people — and to walk alone to a foreign and unknown land.
That is the Jewish story. And it remains Israel’s story today.
Abraham Ortelius map “Journey of Abraham”, 1595
The Call to Walk Alone
Lech Lecha is more than a journey of geography; it is a test of courage. Abraham separated from a world that had lost its moral compass. He stood against the idols of his age.
Israel does the same now. The world pities the violent. It demands “restraint” from the victim and “understanding” for the murderer. Israel stands almost alone — mocked, pressured, condemned — for defending its people from those who glory in death.
Lech Lecha reminds us that holiness begins with separation. To follow conscience sometimes means turning your back on the crowd.
The Lonely Battle
When Abraham heard that his nephew Lot was taken captive, he didn’t wait for permission. He gathered a few hundred men and faced an army of kings. Outnumbered, he fought — and won.
That is Israel today. A small nation surrounded by hostile powers, fighting not for conquest but survival. Like Abraham, it refuses to wait for global approval before rescuing its own.
The Modern Lech Lecha
To stand alone is never easy. It is lonely, painful, and exhausting. But moral isolation is not failure — it is faith.
Abraham began our story by walking away from a world gone mad. Israel continues it by standing firm in one.
Lech Lecha — Go forth. Fight on. Even if you walk alone.
There are signs on the streets of London that read “LOOK RIGHT.” They are painted boldly on the pavement to protect visitors—especially Americans—who are used to glancing left before stepping into the street. In the U.K., traffic comes from the opposite direction, and those who rely on old instincts can find themselves in sudden danger.
So it is now with American Jews.
For generations, they have turned instinctively to the Democratic Party—to the left—out of habit, heritage, and a deep belief that liberal ideals best protected minorities. But the political landscape has shifted beneath their feet. The party that once championed freedom, tolerance, and support for Israel has been co-opted by radicals: anti-Israel voices, socialists, and anarchists who now wield growing influence in its ranks.
These are not the Democrats of old. They are activists who view capitalism as oppression, who denounce Israel as colonial, and who see Jews not as a vulnerable minority but as part of a power structure to be dismantled. They are coming for capitalism—and for the Jews who helped build and sustain it.
This election, American Jews must recognize that the public square is not what it used to be. The political traffic now comes from the right direction—but the danger comes from the left.
When Government Champions Some, and Leaves Jews to Defend Themselves
Westchester County, NY, like much of America, has learned the vocabulary of inclusion. It now boasts a tapestry of advisory boards, task forces, and community liaisons — each designed to protect and empower those who have known prejudice.
There is a Westchester County Asian American Advisory Board, formed after a surge of anti-Asian hate crimes during COVID. It partners with the District Attorney’s office on the #SpeakUpWestchester campaign, translating safety materials into Korean, Mandarin, and Japanese so that no one’s fear goes unheard.
There is also an LGBTQ+ Advisory Board, formally empowered to advise the County Executive, coordinate events, and oversee inclusivity training. The county even facilitated an LGBTQ+-affirming senior housing complex in downtown White Plains with The LOFT Community Center at its core — an unprecedented public-private partnership to create safe spaces for queer residents.
But there is one group that still has to do it all on its own: Jews.
There is no County Jewish Advisory Board. No county liaison for antisemitism. No government program translating “Never Again” into action.
While Asian and LGBTQ+ residents have been given official seats inside government, Jews have been told — quietly, politely — to use their own.
Even the collection of antisemitic incident data — which rose 22 percent in Westchester in 2024 — is largely managed by private watchdogs, not public offices.
The disparity is not just institutional; it is measurable.
Westchester County has 1 million residents, including about 137,000 Jews (14% of the population) and about 65,000 Asian Americans (7%).
According to state hate-crime data and ADL monitoring, there were about 40 antisemitic incidents and 8 anti-Asian incidents reported in Westchester in 2024. That translates to an estimated 29 antisemitic incidents per 100,000 Jewish residents versus roughly 12 per 100,000 Asian residents — a per-capita rate more than twice as high.
Rather than address the antisemitism squarely, Westchester District Attorney Susan Cacace made an inclusive Hate Crimes Advisory Board which had its inaugural meeting on September 29. Cacace was proud of the giant tent and said “the communities represented on this board are broad and diverse, and board members will be able to provide me with direct input from their constituents so that my office may more readily address their concerns.”
The Westchester County District Attorney’s Office’s new Hate Crimes Advisory Board
The all-Democratic Westchester establishment seemed to echo the Democratically-led House of Representatives which refused to condemn antisemitism without adding language about Islamophobia in 2019. Jew protection cannot exist in isolation for some reason for the Blue Team. It seemingly repulses them so much, that when Republicans target antisemitism, they argue that President Trump is “weaponizing antisemitism” and not really concerned about Jews at all.
No one begrudges others their protection. Jews, more than anyone, know the cost of silence. But the imbalance is glaring.
When the Asian community faced hate during COVID, Westchester created a formal board within months. When LGBTQ+ residents sought recognition, government became a partner in building physical spaces of affirmation. But when antisemitic assaults, harassment, and vandalism spiked across campuses, streets, and synagogues, the government offered sympathy — not structure.
Graffiti on Jewish stores in Scarsdale, NY, January 2024
The Jewish paradox
Jews are trapped in a paradox. Their success is cited as proof they don’t need help; their vulnerability dismissed as self-inflicted. They are “white” enough to be privileged, but “Jewish” enough to be blamed.
And so, when antisemitism surges, the reflex of government is not to protect but to delegate — to community partners, to philanthropists, to the victims themselves. Or to give the general feeling of blanket protection alongside others, masking the fact that they are persecuted more frequently than every other minority group.
For centuries, Jews have thrived where societies upheld justice and faltered where governments outsourced their duty.
Antisemites have no issue singling out Jews for attack, yet government officials are loathe to single out Jews for protection which they do so for every other group. It begs the question as to why: are current government leaders antisemitic, or are Jewish leaders telling the government that Jews don’t want special treatment, just to be like everybody else.
If so, what does that mean when “everybody else” gets special treatment?
Why can California, with its Democratic super-majority, advance a mandatory ethnic studies curriculum which empowers Black, Brown, Latin, Asian and Native American communities but disparages Jews?
While Democrats are correct, that Jews would rather be treated the same as everyone else, they cannot sit on the side when special privileges and protections are afforded to every group except Jews, especially while they are under attack. To exclude Jews in favor of victims of preference – or just constituents of preference – is deeply antisemitic.
First One Through 