Mohamed Ousman
Some two-billion people self-appellate as Muslim.
Those in South Africa are especially proud to celebrate the remarkable achievement of Zohran Kwame Mamdani.
They claim that his formative years were somewhat shaped in Claremont, CapeTown, where he began his Islamic education.
Further, that he was inspired by the South African experiences which made a lasting impression on Mamdani’s political consciousness that helped shape his creative, community-based approach to politics.
This flattery is unsurprising.
It originated from the progressive Muslims who practice the politics of inclusivity and renewal through building bridges across race, class and especially (non)faith.
Along these bridge building lines, Muslims worldwide joined the chorus to describe his victory in the New York City mayoral election as a testament to his commitment to social justice and grassroots organizing.
The question that is never asked is: have these progressive Muslims factored in the authoritative presence of Allah when mixing the cement to build their bridges?
Mamdani's ideology is guided by the shifting values of Democratic Socialism, not Islam.
Islam is not an ethnic/cultural identity. It is a commitment to be ever submissive to Allah.
Described as a democratic socialist, his microcosmic/urban policies of universal childcare, affordable living and co-operative business ownership reflects an adaptation of the zionist Israeli kibbutz model.
The unspoken truth regarding this model is that it functions because it is funded by financial aid and support from the United States and other supplementary channels.
Just as the zionist Israeli kibbutz model is described without reference to its umbilical cord that can be traced back to the United States and western financial aid and support, so too this Mamdani victory is described with undisclosed reference to his political umbilical cord that can be traced back to some powerful billionaire Jews in the most Jewish city in the world.
Included are Jewish celebrities from the LGBTQIA+ community, such as Matt Bernstein, Alex Soros, heir to the Soros fortunes, and others.
Although the zionist Soros family is anti-Likud and, therefore, anti-Netanyahu, they are committed to the existence of Israhell via the two state solution and repeatedly condemn the Islamic Resistance group Hamas.
This position is shared by Mamdani and the progressive Muslims rendering them zionist Muslims.
Added to this theatrical was Donald Trump’s politics of division, resentment and prejudice.
It is remarkable to note how commentators, who attest to the United States political system as being the “best democracy money can buy” due to the influence of money in US politics and elections, suddenly became extremely gullible and naïve to repeat the line that Mamdani defeated the billionaire backed candidates!
Any attempt not to penetrate this obvious veneer is to whitewash the reality that American politics is dominated by powerful pro-Israeli Jewish money, often invisible.
Mamdani poses no threat to the status quo.
He appears to be ambivalent about the fight against usurious practices emanating from Wall Street.
Compare this ambivalence with his passionate support for other billionaire sponsored immoral causes such as the disintegration of the family, decriminalization of prostitution, co-sponsorship of legislation and consistent advocacy for gender fluidity, support for the LGBTQIA+ perversion including a dedicated advertisement and attendance at their events is revealing.
According to Mamdani, New York City must be a refuge for LGBTQIA+ people….
He vowed to defend the rights of transgender people, campaigned through the penultimate night at six gay bars and thanked them for creating those spaces.
At his victory speech he repeated his vision to build a City Hall that stands steadfast alongside Jewish New Yorkers and does not waver in the fight against the scourge of antisemitism.
He also said, where the more than one million Muslims know that they belong – not just in the five boroughs of this city, but in the halls of power.
No more will New York be a city where you can traffic in Islamophobia and win an election.
In reality there is no “antisemitism” crisis.
Whereas Islamophobia is a billion dollar propaganda machine primarily funded by Jewish supremacists.
The two are not equal.
Islamophobia is real.
His usage of the word “will” in relation to antisemitism and Islamophobia versus the word “must” in relation to LGBTQIA+ is interesting.
Time will tell where his priorities lie.
The celebration of Mamdani’s victory is not limited to “progressive Muslims”.
Even those on the Left of the political spectrum have been jubilant.
They consider his victory as a victory for the Left.
This reflects a lack of information if not a lack of principle.
Mamdani does not even fit into the traditional ideological paradigm held sacred by those on the Left.
This is evident in his criticism of Cuba and Venezuela where he judged their political systems to be dictatorships.
Had Mamdani victory’s been a reason for celebration, then the victory of Barack Hussein Obama would have made for an even stronger reason to celebrate.
Essentially both advocated for the working class and government control but Mamdani is made to appear populist while Obama was made to appear moderate.
Notwithstanding these minor variances, with Obama being in control of the highest office in the US, if not in the world, the passage of time has demonstrated the implacability of the system.
At the macro level, global policy spearheaded by the US foreign policy at the time of Obama dictated that a person with a dark skin pigmentation and African features would be most effective for its imperial desire to penetrate and exploit Africa.
Global policy at this time revolves around you will own nothing and be happy.
At the local level, there is a need to embed this policy.
In the short to medium term, a social democrat could facilitate the transfer of whatever little wealth remains in the hands of the working class into state structures at an unprecedented level with public support.
Mamdani has entered the terrain of crises management on behalf of the zionist Israeli Jewish king-makers.
He has not done so because he is a Muslim.
It is irrelevant that he was born into a Khoja-Muslim family and was subsequently educated within a Sunni-Muslim establishment.
Muslims covetous for government positions should not be blinded by self-interest.
The managers of the political terrain with its numerous deep rooted structural crises will change cyclically.
These self-serving cultural Muslims in high public office have no Islamic mandate.
They are careerists and functionaries executing orders on behalf of their paymasters.
They do not even have a mandate from the oppressed people who are used as voter fodder.
In order to understand this, it is important to understand that the Qur’an always has a context.
Most times, at the macro level, when the Qur’an addresses the responsibilities associated with being in high office or in public service, it is in the context of an Islamic State, under an Islamic leadership and in pursuit of justice within an all-encompassing, harmonious paradigm.
Acting outside this set-up is serfdom and slavery where the serf is bound to have ideological conflicts demanding trade-offs, such as between economic prosperity and dignity, etc.
This trade-off is the fundamental problem with democratic socialism and the narrative of Leftists politics.
In it, humans are reduced to economic instruments and degradation, such as prostitution is redefined as “work”.
“And We set up leaders from among them who, so long as they persevered [in obeying Us] and were absolutely certain of Our power presence, would guide [others] in accordance with Our concern.” (The Ascendant Qur’an, Surat Al Sajdah verse 24).
