Wednesday, June 3, 2026

Matt Moberg: Look. Look Again. Look Until Looking Becomes Love

Photo by Molly
I think every human being

eventually has a moment
where they are standing outside in sweatpants
that have lost the will to be pants,
holding a trash bag, a divorce, a parking ticket,
or some other receipt from the universe
that says, “surprise, this too is part of it.”
And then the sky bruises purple.
And the air touches your face
like it knows your whole story.
And suddenly you realize:
all the real is actually unreal.
The dirt.
The breath.
The weird little bones in your hands.
The fact that we are here,
on a floating rock with pollen counts,
paying bills,
missing dead people,
loving living people
who say “leaving now”
while still fully naked and looking for socks.
And still,
the moon clocks in.
No applause.
No benefits.
No note from management saying,
“Great work being ancient and luminous again.”
Just the moon,
working nights
like a single mother with no applause,
packing silver lunches
for every dark thing
that still has to rise.
Tell me that isn’t holy.
Tell me there is a better word
than sacred
for the way light keeps returning
with no guarantee
we will actually stop and take note.
I know people who believe in therapy,
probiotics,
tarot,
twelve-step meetings,
manifestation journals,
and waiting exactly eleven minutes
before texting back
so they do not appear emotionally available,
even though their whole nervous system
is standing in the driveway holding flowers.
And underneath all of it,
every ritual,
every doctrine,
every smoothie with chia seeds,
the prayer is the same:
Please let me be loved.
Please let me be forgiven.
Please let this strange little life
mean something
before my lower back
submits its formal resignation.
What is going on?
For real tho—What is this place?
This unbearable tenderness
of being alive long enough
to watch steam lift from coffee in winter
like a soul practicing leaving.
To see your friend laugh so hard
they slap the table
as if joy is a mosquito
they are trying to kill.
To hear a child say “pisghetti”
and, for one shining second,
realize language
has finally been improved.
I know I already noted this in the first piece,
but the older I get,
the less use I have for certainty.
Certainty has never made me pull over
because the sunset looked like God
dropped a jar of peach jam
across the whole midwestern sky
and decided to be lazy
and not clean up.
Certainty has never made me gasp
at rain on hot pavement.
Certainty has never found me
in the cereal aisle,
holding Captain Crunch,
suddenly remembering
that everyone I have ever loved
was made from stardust,
hunger,
and a series of decisions
we probably should have slept on.
No.
It has always been awe.
Awe was the first church.
Before steeples.
Before committees.
Before men got involved
and started making rules about skirts.
Awe was there
with its wild hair
and muddy feet,
saying:
Look.
Look again.
Look until looking
becomes love.
Awe, and soup.
Awe, and someone rubbing your back
when you are sick.
Awe, and old couples at Target
arguing gently about avocados,
as if marriage is not one vow
but ten thousand errands
performed beside the person
who knows exactly
how you like the cart pushed.
Maybe gratitude
was never meant to sound elegant.
Maybe gratitude sounds like:
“Damn.
That woodpecker is trying
to beat that tree from itself.”
Maybe gratitude sounds like:
“Thank you, body,
for continuing to drag me through this world
despite the many slim jims
I have done to you
at gas stations.”
Maybe gratitude sounds like:
“Thank you to the dogs
who lose their entire minds
when we come home
as if we have returned from war
and not Walgreens.”
For me, that might be my gospel.
That joy that does not wait for us
to be impressive but only needs us
to come through the door.
Because the truth is,
this life is devastating.
And ridiculous.
One minute you are 22 and invincible,
driving too fast,
eating gas station nachos
with the confidence of a Greek god.
The next minute you are googling,
“Can sneezing cause a hamstring injury?”
and the answer is,
apparently,
“Welcome to the second half of your life.”
But even now—
even tired,
even grieving,
even emotionally held together
by iced coffee, playlists,
and one very specific wolves hoodie—
we keep finding reasons
to stay soft.
We plant tomatoes
even though grief is real.
We bake bread
even though the news is on fire.
We send photos of the sky
to people we love
with captions like,
“LOOK,”
as if beauty is an emergency
and we are all volunteer firefighters.
We keep saying,
“You have to see this,”
because wonder
is the oldest form
of resurrection.
So here’s to the believers
and the atheists
and the agnostics
and the people whose entire theology
is just trying not to cry
in the DMV line.
Here’s to the people clinging to faith.
Here’s to the people clinging to Xanax
and oat milk
and the one group chat
where nobody pretends to be okay.
Here’s to the tender-hearted weirdos.
The accidental mystics.
The ones who can contemplate mortality
for six straight hours
and then become emotionally attached
to a perfect peach.
The ones who know
despair has a mouth,
but so does laughter.
May we never stop being drop-kicked by beauty
in the middle of a Sunday afternoon.
May we never become so polished
that we forget how to stand
in the Starbucks line of existence
with our dumb, gorgeous hearts open,
feeling the enormity of it all
rattle around in our bones
like thunder
looking for somewhere to laugh.
And may we remember:
whatever else this is,
whatever mess,
whatever miracle,
whatever cosmic group project
no one was prepped for—
all’ve it is astonishing.
that we are here.
that we have loved enough to be ruined.
that the moon keeps showing up.
that bread exists.
So pass it on.
Tear off a piece
with your bare hands.
Take it in as you take it down.
And then go outside and look at that moon.



Oliver Kornetzke: 250 Years. This Is What We Built

So excellent! I deeply appreciate and respect Oliver Kornetzke. Powerful! And so horrifying and heartbreaking in its breathtaking depth of reality and tragic truth. Blessed be the truth-tellers!! — Molly


250 years. Two hundred and fifty fucking years of the most powerful, most resourced, most theoretically capable nation in the history of human civilization and here is what we have to show for it.
Forty million people on food stamps, thirty million without health insurance, the highest maternal mortality rate in the developed world, the highest incarceration rate on earth, an opioid crisis that has killed over half a million people and counting, a housing market so broken that working people cannot afford to live in the cities they work in, an education system that buries young people in debt before they earn their first dollar, infrastructure that is literally collapsing, a life expectancy that is going backwards, a political system so thoroughly purchased by concentrated wealth that the laws it produces bear almost no relationship to what the public actually wants or needs, a working class that has not seen meaningful real wage growth in thirty years, a mental health crisis so severe we normalized it, a gun violence epidemic so routine we don’t even act when preschoolers are slaughtered, and a climate hurtling toward catastrophe while the people paid to address it collect checks from the industry causing it.
Two hundred and fifty years of that. And to celebrate, we built a wrestling arena on the White House lawn.
Not a hospital, or a school, or a housing development. Not a single fucking thing that addresses a single goddamn item on the list above. A wrestling arena. With cranes and pyrotechnics and a steel arch that probably cost more than the annual budget of three rural counties combined, erected in front of the building where Lincoln and Roosevelt and every president who ever tried to make any of this mean something once lived and worked and in some cases died trying.
Truthfully, this is not a departure from American values. This is the fullest possible expression of them. Because this is what we chose. Every single time the choice was presented.
We built a culture where a football coach makes forty times what a physics professor makes and then express genuine bewilderment at the outcomes. Where a reality television star becomes president and a school district cuts its art program in the same fiscal year. Where children know every statistic of every player on their favorite sport team and cannot locate their own country on a map. Where scientific consensus on vaccines, climate, evolution, and basic nutrition gets weighed against a Facebook post and the Facebook post wins at the dinner table. Where the school that wins the state championship gets a parade and the school that produces a Nobel laureate gets a budget cut.
We chose the bomber over the teacher. The tank over the clinic. The aircraft carrier over the water treatment plant. We spend more on military than the next ten countries combined, including our allies, while veterans sleep on the streets of the cities they came back to. We built the most expensive killing apparatus in human history and then told the nurse she made too much money. We sent young men to die in wars that made defense contractors rich and called it freedom and put a yellow ribbon magnet on the back of the car and called that support. We made the soldier and the police officer into sacred untouchable symbols of national identity and then cut their benefits, denied their PTSD claims, let them die waiting for VA appointments, and sent them back for third and fourth tours because it was cheaper than taking care of them when they came home. We worshipped the uniform and neglected the human inside it because the uniform is a symbol and symbols are cheaper than healthcare and housing and the therapy that would actually help. We built bases in a hundred and fifty countries and could not build enough affordable housing in fifty states. We funded a military budget that could have ended homelessness and medical debt and student debt several times over and we did it with bipartisan enthusiasm and called the people who questioned it unserious.
We chose entertainment over education so many times and for so long and at every available level of society that we forgot there was a distinction worth making. Spectacle over substance, performance over policy, the aesthetics of greatness in place of the actual thing, and the feeling of winning instead of asking what was being won and who was paying for it and what it would cost the people who came next.
Rome had bread and circuses. We Americans have food stamps and a wrestling ring outside the Oval Office.
250 years. This is what we built. This is what we chose. This is what we are celebrating. And the most perfectly, catastrophically, irreducibly American thing about all of it is that anyone pointing at this image and asking what it means will be called unpatriotic by people watching it on a television they bought on credit they cannot afford to pay back, rooting for a sport they cannot explain, in a country they cannot describe, celebrating a birthday they cannot contextualize, for a nation that has spent two and a half centuries confusing the noise it makes with the work it never did, all while claiming to be the greatest country on Earth.
Happy Birthday America! You have never looked more like yourself!


Electile Dysfunction—Why Can’t the Dems Get Their Polls Up?

The most fundamental dilemma resides in the Faustian bargain the party entered beginning in the 1970s. It is madness to embrace the corruption of prioritizing the expectations of the wealthy donor class rather than the needs of We the People and the planet. It is also critical to illuminate, which this article sadly does not, that the Democratic Party continues to be aligned with Netanyhu and AIPAC and Zionist forces dropping the bombs obliterating the Palestinian people and their land. So many of us refuse to support any politician who is funding genocide. — Molly

Democratic presidential candidate, then-US Vice President Kamala Harris, speaks at a campaign rally at United Auto Workers Local 900 on August 8, 2024 in Wayne, Michigan. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
The Democratic Party cannot afford to attend to the material needs of its traditional popular base because it is terrified of offending its donor class.

By 

“The Republicans go for the jugular; the Democrats go for the capillaries,”—Kevin Phillips

With the recent release of the long-withheld, but little anticipated Democratic National Committee “autopsy” of the 2024 presidential electoral loss, we’re back to the perennial questions of which issues should receive priority; how should messaging and narrative around those issues be crafted; which wing(s) of the party should be amputated before their rot infects the entire organism, suburban soccer moms or inner city youth; and on and on. All good questions, but ultimately, in present circumstances, unanswerable except in the most platitudinous, hand-waving ways. The most fundamental dilemma resides in the Faustian bargain the party entered beginning in the 1970s, and the result of that bargain is neatly captured in Sheldon Wolin’s 2010 coinage “the inauthentic opposition”:

While the transformed Republican Party reveals what a “party of government” might look like under inverted totalitarianism, the Democrats reveal the fate of opposition politics under inverted totalitarianism. The Democrats’ politics might be described as inauthentic opposition in the era of Superpower [i.e., the US after the fall of the Soviet Union]. Having fended off its reformist elements and disclaimed the label of liberal, it is trapped by new rules of the game which dictate that a party exists to win elections rather than to promote a vision of the good society… Accordingly, the party competes for an apolitical segment of the electorate, “the undecided,” and puzzles how best to woo religious zealots. Should Democrats somehow be elected, corporate sponsors make it politically impossible for the new officeholders to alter significantly the direction of society. [This point is exquisitely exemplified by the first couple of years of the Obama administration, when they held the federal trifecta and still managed to privilege the kleptocratic banksters of the housing crisis and the war criminal gangsters of the W. Bush regime.] The timidity of a Democratic Party mesmerized by centrist precepts points to the crucial fact that, for the poor, minorities, the working class, anticorporatists, pro-environmentalists, and anti-imperialists, there is no opposition party working actively on their behalf.

The origins of this current malaise date back to the mid 1970s, and followed the actions taken by business class elites responding to the exhortations contained in the now-famous Powell Memorandum. This was a secret 1971 memo from then-corporate lawyer Lewis Powell to the Secretary of the US Chamber of Commerce. The memo wasn’t revealed to the public until well after Powell had been appointed to the Supreme Court, where he continued to wage his ideological battle in defense of capitalism and corporate power (including, of course, free speech rights articulated in cash). In the memo Powell argued that:

The US Chamber of Commerce should lead an assault upon the major institutions, universities, schools, the media, publishing, the courts, in order to change how individuals think about the corporation, the law, culture, and the individual.

US businesses, Powell suggested, did not lack the resources for such an effort, particularly if they were pooled. That is, if people started to think together as a class rather than as individual firms and corporations. The US Chamber of Commerce took up this challenge in a very dramatic way. It expanded its base from around 60,000 firms in 1972 to about a quarter of a million just a decade later. Other elite organizational forms also began to coalesce around this core following the advice of the memo. These included think tanks (e.g., the Heritage Foundation, established 1973 by Adolph Coors), as well as corporate money pumps to operationalize the memo’s chief objectives.

One of the most prominent of these organizations was the Business Roundtable, founded in 1972, and comprising CEOs whose corporations at the time accounted for about half of the US gross national product. During this period, through political action committees, the Roundtable was spending about $900 million annually on political matters, a very significant sum at the time. These newly emerging entities provided a mechanism for corporations to contribute substantial funds to political campaigns and candidates, authorized in large measure through a number of Supreme Court rulings, several written by Powell himself.

These PACs, which were just beginning to have a political presence (there were 89 PACs in 1974, and around 1,500 by 1982) gave to both parties largely in equal measure in the 70s, but began leaning heavily toward the Republicans, who had little difficulty aligning their platforms with capital corporate interests. This was also the moment that the traditional political base of the Republican Party began to merge with the Christian Right and with white working classes, who were persuaded that they had been left behind by affirmative action and other “illegitimate” policies (now, of course, cloaked as DEI and “wokeness”).

The problem for anyone struggling to get by, as this alliance portrayed it, was not capitalism and the neoliberalization of the society and economy. The real problem was liberals, who had used excessive state power to provide for special groups. The prevalent narrative, more pertinent now than ever, was the idea of unworthy “others” cutting in line ahead of worthy citizens: “You’ve worked hard. You’ve played by the rules. You’re not getting ahead. Well, it’s not that the system is stacked against you. It’s that these people, who are undeserving, are getting more advantages than you get.” The Republican political base (and now most particularly MAGAnites) could be energized through positive mobilizations of things like religion and cultural nationalism, but it could also be turned out through very negative, though coded, though I would say increasingly less coded if not blatant, racism (e.g., President Richard Nixon’s “southern strategy”), xenophobia, homophobia, and anti-feminism.

Democrats, seemingly, were more conflicted, at least at that time, between support for their base and the need to pursue big money. That ambivalence, at least within the ranks of the Democratic Party establishment in its current manifestation, has now all but disappeared and constitutes the irreconcilable contradiction that plagues the party now. To return for a moment to Wolin:

By ignoring dissent and by assuming that the dissenters have no alternative, the party serves an important, if ironical, stabilizing function and in effect marginalizes any possible threat to the corporate allies of the Republicans.

According to critical geographer David Harvey, the structure that emerged out of this political realignment was as simple as it was predictable and durable. The Republican Party could, and still can, marshal massive financial resources and mobilize its popular base to vote against its own material interests on cultural or religious grounds, while simultaneously advancing the capital accumulation policies (ongoing war and arms sales, lowered taxation, massive deregulation, privatization of public goods and services) of their elite masters.

The Democratic Party, conversely, could not, and still cannot, afford to attend to the material needs (e.g., a national healthcare system, affordable housing, environmental and consumer protection, financial and anti-trust regulation, a peace dividend) of its traditional popular base because it was and is terrified of offending its donor class. Given the asymmetry, the political hegemony of the Republican Party became more sure over this period, and has relegated the Democrats, even when in power, to their current position of inauthenticity. If and until this most fundamental contradiction can be resolved, the policies and messaging will remain flaccid, impotent, and unsatisfying. Under these circumstances we can aptly paraphrase Phillips, to wit: So now the Democrats also go for the jugular. Unfortunately, it’s too often their own.

Please go here for the original article: https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/why-can-t-dems-win?share_id=9542184&socialux=facebook&utm_campaign=RebelMouse&utm_content=Common+Dreams&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook

Qasim Rashid: Corporate Media Asks Why Mamdani Skipped the Israel Day Parade Because They Lack The Courage to Ask the Hard Question

Excellent, powerful article! This shines bright light on Zohran Mamdani’s integrity and why no one of conscience and morals and grounding in opposing genocide should be attending this. I also deeply hope that more and more of us will read Omar El Akkad’s deeply important book One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This (https://www.amazon.com/Everyone-Will-Have-Always-Against/dp/0593804147?tag=ustxtaddt-20). — Molly


Corporate media is going wild asking "Why didn't Mayor Mamdani attend the Israel day parade?"
But this is the wrong question.
There is a pattern with New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and the media that has become almost poetic in its predictability.
When he was running for mayor, reporters asked whether he would travel to Israel if elected? He said he was focused on New York City and affordability for all New Yorkers. The media laughed. He won—by a historic margin—and his approval on inauguration day was +38.
Now he is mayor, and reporters are asking whether he will attend the Israel Day Parade? He says again he is focused on New York City and affordability for all New Yorkers. The media is once again predicting his political demise. His approval rating is now at +48.
The entire framing of this made up controversy is backwards. Corporate media is asking the wrong question, and the right one is one they don’t have the courage to ask. What exactly is that question? Let’s Address This.
The Question No One in Corporate Media Is Asking
The question every elected official, every member of the media, every person who cares about human rights should be asking is: Why would any elected official committed to justice and human decency attend a parade featuring officials who openly celebrate racism, dehumanization, and genocide?
Think I’m being hyperbolic? Call me CVS because I’m about to issue you some receipts. Let me introduce you to the Knesset delegation sent to represent Israel at this year’s parade:
Amir Ohana, the Knesset Speaker who is heading the entire Israeli delegation, has publicly claimed that Muslims are prone to “cultural murderousness.” He has called for the complete annexation of the West Bank as “the one and only way” to peace. He has declared that Gaza “will be a better place without the devil”—referring to Palestinian civilians. He is leading the delegation to the Israel Day Parade.
Amichai Eliyahu, Israel’s Heritage Minister and member of the far-right Kahanist party Otzma Yehudit, has stated that Israel should use a nuclear bomb on Gaza. He has said publicly that “all of Gaza will be Jewish.” He has called for the complete occupation of Gaza after the war and the rebuilding of settlements. He has called for executing Palestinian prisoners. As starvation rose across Gaza, he declared Israel is “driving out” Gazans. His prime minister had to publicly warn him to stop talking.
Yitzhak Wasserlauf, also a member of the Kahanist Otzma Yehudit party, whose presence at a Ben-Gurion memorial was described by Ben-Gurion’s own grandson as “disrespectful” to the founder of Israel’s legacy.
Amichai Chikli, Israel’s Diaspora Minister—the official literally tasked with representing Israel to Jewish communities abroad—has made an obscene gesture toward protesters at the very parade he is now returning to attend. He has been called someone who “doesn’t understand Jewish Diaspora” by a senior U.S. official. He has invited politicians from European far-right parties to Israel. He was ordered to apologize for inviting British far-right agitator Tommy Robinson to Jerusalem. He has met with far-right conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer.
As if these calls to violence are not revolting enough, I’m nowhere near done. Then there are the other members of this delegation whose documented statements include:
Ariel Kallner declared “Gazans are plump and healthy; it’s all nonsense”—as international aid organizations documented mass starvation—and added “whoever remains in the north, we will truly starve them.” The same official who in October 2023 called for “a Nakba that will overshadow the Nakba of ‘48.”
Yitzhak Kroizer stated that “even if collateral damage includes children or women, it doesn’t matter to me”—and “there are no innocent civilians, no innocent children in Jenin.” (These are war crimes by the way).
Meirav Ben Ari declared “the children in Gaza have brought this upon themselves.”
Imagine if these statements were made about any other marginalized community. Who in their right mind would tolerate them as a mere difference of opinion?
What elected official—what person of conscience—should be expected to share a stage, a platform, and a photo op with people who have uttered such horrors? What human rights advocate, what public servant, what mayor of Earth’s most diverse city should be required to stand alongside officials who have called for war crimes on civilians, bragged about starving people, and declared that dead children brought it on themselves?
The question is not why Mamdani stayed away.
The question is why the media and those in power are silent about the politicians showing up to lock arms with these violent extremists? Sadly, no one in corporate media is willing to ask that question. And we are all worse off for it.
Who Mamdani Actually Is to New York's Jewish Community
The legacy media narrative being constructed around Mamdani’s absence is one of the most dishonest narratives in recent New York political history—and the Jewish Forward is calling it out directly.
Writing in the Forward, Libby Lenkinski—who attended Mamdani’s Shavuot gathering honoring Ruth Messinger—describes what the media is consistently missing:
When the mayor roared ‘chag sameach!’ into the room, smiling broadly, it did not feel performative to many of us because many of us actually know him. Personally. Through him showing up in Jewish spaces across New York over these past few years. I have run into Mamdani on Yom Kippur. At Oct. 7 vigils. At Passover events.
Lenkinski asks the question directly:
Why are we hearing so much more about the Jews who object to Mamdani’s policies than the many of us who embrace them? Last week’s gathering included progressive Jews, anti-occupation Jews, Israeli expats, liberal rabbis, artists, nonprofit workers, old-school establishment figures and more. Are our reasons for joyfully engaging with Mamdani so much less interesting than the boycotters’ reasons for questioning him?
And she makes the point that should reframe this entire conversation:
Almost 40% of American Jews believe Israel committed a genocide in Gaza. Is a mayor who has opened the door to those viewpoints—when those of us who hold them have often been excluded from official spaces—neglecting the Jewish community, or just engaging with it in a different way?
This is the truth the media refuses to tell. Mamdani does not represent a fringe view of the Jewish community. He represents the view of 4 in 10 American Jews—a view that has historically been silenced, marginalized, and excluded from official spaces. He has opened those doors.
And beyond his personal relationships, his governance tells the real story.
Under Mayor Mamdani, New York City has invested in a more than 800% increase in resources to fight hate crimes amid rising antisemitism. He has appointed Jewish leaders like Phylisa Wisdom to lead citywide efforts to confront hate and protect Jewish New Yorkers. The NYPD likewise reports that overall violent crime is at historic lows in the first quarter of his tenure.
This is what protecting Jewish New Yorkers and protecting all New Yorkers actually looks like—just as Mamdani promised on the campaign trail. Not a photo op at a parade featuring officials who praise the starvation of civilians. Actual policy. Actual investment. Actual results. And this begs another important question—who is actually behind the national rise in antisemitism?
Who Is Actually Driving Antisemitism in America?
And since the media wants to frame Mamdani’s absence as a Jewish community issue, let us talk about who is actually threatening Jewish Americans—because the data is unambiguous and it demolishes the premise of this entire controversy.
I have written in detail about the ADL’s own dataset of antisemitic incidents in the United States. Since 2002, the ADL has documented 40,180 cases of antisemitism in America. Of those, the number attributable to “Islamist” ideology is two. Not two percent. Two incidents. The number attributable to “Leftist” ideology is one.
Effectively 100% of documented antisemitic attacks in the United States come from right-wing extremists, white supremacists, and Christian nationalists.
Now look at the officials attending this parade. Amichai Chikli—the man who made an obscene gesture at protesters and invited Tommy Robinson to Jerusalem—invited politicians from European far-right parties to Israel. He met with Laura Loomer. The parade is featuring officials ideologically aligned with the very movement responsible for nearly every documented antisemitic attack in America.
Is it any surprise that those same right wing extremists are projecting their own hate on Mayor Zohran Mamdani—the Muslim mayor of New York City who invested 800% more in fighting hate crimes and antisemitism and shows up at Yom Kippur and October 7 vigils?
The people actually aligned with the forces threatening Jewish Americans are being celebrated at the parade he declined to attend.
This inversion of reality is not accidental. It is the product of a media ecosystem that, as the Forward’s Lenkinski writes, has become:
Invested in telling a story about Jews and public life that leaves very little room for complexity, coexistence, contradiction or ordinary human interaction. A story in which Jews are perpetually under threat from everyone around them. A story in which Muslim politicians and Jewish communities are naturally destined for conflict.
Reality, as the data shows, tells a very different picture. It is indefensible that corporate media continues to ignore that reality, as once again, it harms us all.
On Free Speech and What Mamdani Is Actually Doing
Finally, I want to address one more layer of this—because the argument proffered against Mayor Mamdani is not just factually wrong. It is philosophically incoherent.
No one is accusing Mayor Mamdani of calling for these Israeli officials to be censored. He has not. No one is accusing him of calling for them to be banned from the parade. He has not. He is not even protesting their presence or demanding they be silenced.
He is simply declining to stand next to them.
Free speech means tolerating even speech you find repugnant. It does not mean being required to personally associate with, endorse, or attend events featuring people who brag about starving children and calling for nuclear weapons on civilian populations. These are two entirely different things—and the conflation of them is either confused or dishonest.
Mayor Mamdani is exercising the same right that every American has: the right to choose who he stands with and what he lends his presence and his platform to.
That is not intolerance. That is integrity.
Mamdani Is What Moral Consistency Actually Looks Like
Finally, in closing, the vast majority of New Yorkers see this integrity. Mayor Mamdani’s +48 approval is not an accident. It is the verdict of a city that has watched this mayor show up for all New Yorkers, including Jewish New Yorkers—consistently and authentically. It is that consistency—that refusal to perform solidarity while abandoning its substance—that makes the intolerant so furious.
And it is that consistency that should inspire the rest of us to demand more of every leader we support. So rather than asking why Mayor Mamdani refuses to stand with politicians who violently dehumanize millions of people, ask the real question: why are certain politicians willing to do so?
----
Read full article here with links and receipts: https://www.qasimrashid.com/.../corporate-media-asks-why...
Subscribe to support independent media here: https://www.qasimrashid.com/subscribe
Photo Credit: NYC comptroller, Brad Lander, and Zohran Mamdani attend a 10/7 vigil. Photograph: Milo Hess/Zuma Press Wire/Shutterstock