The perplexity of the left in recent years has not so much to do with the lack of electoral successes as with the fact that a large part of its natural electorate has embraced the proposals of the far right. That’s where it hurts. And where, more than ever, she was called to revolutionize her discourse.
Its fall into identity politics, from which there is no longer anyone who can remove the label Wokismit ended up proving ineffective. Perhaps because of his hypermoralizing arrogance and his undoubted inquisitorial prejudices. And because, as John Gray said, the problem of Wokism it must be “a type of hyper-Christianity devoid of transcendence and forgiveness.”
When acting in politics one cannot help but be carried away by moral convictions. But a politician should not give lessons on morality, but rather know how to translate his idea of justice into the logic of the ruthless world of politics, so full of contradictions and within a universe where pluralism of conceptions of good predominates.
Zohran Mamdani’s resounding victory in New York can be explained precisely in this way, because he was able to synthesize the ideology of the American radical left in a set of proposals aimed at improving the daily life of the common citizen; and within these, taking care of the needs of those most in need. With a non-trivial addition these days: weaving a simple communication strategy free of pompous doctrinal statements. The left not as a moralizing doctrine, but as an action program based on clear and precise premises, adapted to the millimeter to the specific problems of citizens. The cost of living (accessibility) as a central idea: affordable housing, free transportation and nursery, protection of small businesses, cooperativism, urban environmentalism… All this without, of course, giving up one’s beliefs woke upbut without presenting them as infallible dogmas.
The most notable thing about his ideology is that it dares to oppose the assumptions of rampant neoliberalism; that is to say, that an alternative is missing. At the heart of the money world’s core, it calls for grassroots socialism supported by something like community activism, which at the same time destroys the potential of democratic socialism. And then he leaves and, what’s more, wins the election. It is not surprising that right now representatives of a whole group of European left-wing parties are coming to New York to give them the recipe for their success. Or that even someone like Bannon, who personalizes his antagonist better than anyone else, recognizes the success of his communication strategy and warns that the Republicans are facing a serious enemy, especially due to their ability to mobilize sectors hitherto reluctant to participate in politics. And he ends up prophesying that «we will see a new group mamdanis in big cities.”
The latter is the great unknown of the moment, will it have a multiplier effect or will it end up being an isolated case adapted to the peculiar objective situation of New York? Will it serve as a model for a widespread political strategy in the Democratic Party or, as in the case of Bernie Sanders, will it remain a mere spark incapable of igniting a lasting flame?
It’s not easy for him, of course: the city mayor doesn’t have the fiscal means to finance all his proposals, apart from the fact that Trump’s counterattack has not yet been seen. But, be that as it may, he indicated a path for the reconstruction of a once dead left. And he did it in a way that was as intelligent and effective as it was elegant. Ideas count, but so do the qualities of the person who represents them.
