A (0:00)

Foreign It's Tuesday, January 6, 2026. I'm Albert Mohler and this is the Briefing, a daily analysis of news and events from a Christian worldview. It's now His Honor, Mayor momdani as of January 1, 2026. Zoram Mamdani is now the elected mayor of New York City. He becomes the youngest mayor in about a century. He becomes the first Muslim mayor, and he becomes the first democratic socialist mayor of America's largest city. All of this comes as a seismic political movement is reshaping, you can't say at this point of the American political landscape. It is certainly recasting the political left. It is reshaping that part of the landscape. And eventually, of course, they hope to dominate in the larger political landscape as well. Now, there's some really interesting things going on here. First of all, let's just remind ourselves that Zora Mandani was born outside the United States. Let's also remember the fact that his parents are pretty radical in terms of their own politics. His father is a professor, an academic, very much in the mold of Edward Said, very much committed to critical theory and to anti colonialist understandings. The ideologies of the insurgent left much of the Third World, the developing world. And you also have the fact that his mother very much involved in the media and film production. Zaram Mandani is a child of privilege, yet he ran as the champion of the underdog, a fascinating figure, I think, just if you look at Zaram Mandani, former member of the assembly, and then he had the audacious idea to run for the office of mayor of New York City, no one gave him much of a chance. He wasn't even really on the political landscape. Although he had a pretty big social media impact. He decided to run for mayor. And of course there were others in the race. And in the race for the Democratic Party, you eventually had the former governor of New York State, Andrew Cuomo, who of course was elected multiple times to that office, but then left in disgrace as a part of the MeToo movement. Andrew Cuomo was something of a classic in Democratic politics. Elected several times as New York's governor. His father, Mario Cuomo, had been an iconic figure in the Democratic Party in the latter part of the 20th century. Cuomo seemed to be a magical name, and yet he could not gain traction. Perhaps it was the disgrace of having to resign the office of governor. Perhaps it was just that the youthful base that eventually elected Zaram Mandani didn't want anything to do with an old Democrat of the likes of Andrew Cuomo. In any event, it was a massive lurch to the left. There will be political scientists looking at the mobilizing effort undertaken by the Mamdani campaign. They're gonna be looking at this for a long time. And the Democratic Party is going to have to take note because the Democratic Party has been tilting significantly in a young, leftward direction. And Zoram Mandani is the very epitome of that direction. That's the point. He is charismatic. He's obviously highly gifted. He's highly intelligent, but he is also radical. He is an openly identified Democratic Socialist. We're going to be looking at his inaugural address in which he made those convictions very clear. He made clear he's not running from them, he's running towards them. That's not unprecedented in Democratic mayoral politics in New York City. But those experiments have generally not ended well. And it's unlikely that Zoram Mandani's plans can end well either, simply because socialism, to put it bluntly, doesn't work. It doesn't work anywhere it is tried. It's certainly not likely to work in New York City. More on that in just a moment. Let's go back to the inauguration. Let's just set the stage. There were two other major Democrats who were also identified as Democratic socialists there on the platform. The ceremonial oath of office was administered by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. And, you know, if you're looking at the old and the new on the political left in the United States, it's fascinating just to take a picture of Bernie Sanders. What does he generally look like? Scowling, frowning, angry, yelling. Then look at Zoram Mandani. What does he look like? Yes. Young, svelte, sophisticated, smiling, indeed, grinning most of the time. He is a charismatic figure in the way Bernie Sanders never was. We don't know at this point in democratic national politics what a really charismatic Democratic socialist might look like. And of course, there is Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, representative, also Democrat of New York, also taking part in the ceremony. But let's look at the inaugural address because it simply demands our attention. So this took place on the first of the year, New Year's Day, by the way. Mamdani entered office basically at just the stroke of the clock at midnight in the transition from December 31 to January 1. But as is often the case, that was simply a legal oath of office. The ceremony would wait until the next day. Mayor Mondani was inaugurated, but he was already mayor when he stepped on the platform. Interestingly, when he began his inaugural address, he said that he was honored to serve New York City as either the city's 111th or 112th mayor. Something of an inside joke there. New York isn't certain the number of its mayors, and that's simply a function of the fact that the cities had convoluted politics going back for so long in America's history. So he's either the 111th or 112th mayor of New York City, it is believed. But he chose to speak in his own terms as a man of the people. He even claimed to speak on behalf of the people of New York City. It is a typical political rhetorical device. It makes sense. You speak as the very symbol of the people. He set himself up that way. He spoke with all the opening ceremonial words you might expect. He also went deeply into his experience growing up as a boy in New York City. He spoke of the neighborhoods, languages, the ethnicities, the customs, the food. But that just gets us to the meat of his address, which was all about ideology and policy. Mamdandi declared, quote, beginning today, we will govern expansively and audaciously. We may always succeed, but we will never be accused of lacking the courage to try. That's been one of his major themes, political audacity. That is to say, he is seizing the moment. He intends to have big, bold goals, and indeed he does. He continued, quote, to those who insist that the era of big government is over. Hear me when I say this. No longer will City hall hesitate to use its power to improve New Yorkers lives. End quote. So that sounds very much like someone in the heritage of Woodrow Wilson, most importantly, perhaps of presidents such as Franklin Delano Roosevelt, President Lyndon Baines Johnson. We're going to seize government. We're even going to expand government. We're not going to apologize for big government. And of course, let's just look at the reality. New York City, you're looking at the very essence of big government. You're also looking at all of the problems that come with those two words separate big and government put together. It is a disaster. Big government, New York City is known for its governmental sclerosis and of course, for its often very well documented corruption for all kinds of problems. And now you have a mayor who says in the name of the people, he wants an even bigger government. He considers that audacious. It is audacious. It might also be something like irrational. He said many things in this address. Consider this line, quote, for too long we have turned to the public sector for greatness while accepting mediocrity from those who serve the public. He says, I cannot blame anyone who has come to question the role of government, whose faith in democracy has been eroded by decades of apathy, end quote. The interesting thing there is where he says, for too long, portraits of greatness have appeared in the private sector. But he says greatness belongs in government. That's a very interesting thing for us to consider because when you're thinking about certain political roles, there is an opportunity for greatness, but that opportunity is sometimes rare. Just to put this as an historical footnote, former President Bill Clinton, outside of office after serving eight years as President of the United States, once lamented that he'd been robbed of the opportunity for long term presidential greatness because he hadn't led the nation in something like a war during his period in office. The point is that greatness is not just an ambition. It's often the context and the political opportunity. And when you look at the comparison that Zoram Mandani made here between the private sector and the public sector, he thinks he's saying something very significant by suggesting that the public sector should be where greatness appears. But that is actually not what has marked American society. Interesting footnote, but we have to move on. In his address, the new mayor indicated that one of his mentors and someone, quote, whose leadership I seek most to emulate is Senator Bernie Sanders. He went on to identify himself once again as a Democratic Socialist. It is interesting that in the official transcript of his address that is offered by City hall there in New York, his own office, Democratic is capitalized and socialist is, in a smaller case, the S. And that indicates something interesting because he has been a member of the dsa, which is the Democratic Socialists of America. So it was Bernie Sanders at some point, also aoc, that is a formal political party, and he's been long identified with it. But he now wants to use a lowercase s because he really wants to be the symbol of the Democratic Party, not so much just of the Democratic Socialists of America. That organization, by the way, was founded in 1982. It was the combination of some previous socialist streams. The dsa, as it was known, founded by socialist Michael Harrington. It has defined democratic socialism as a form of socialism that is brought about by vote, that is to say, by popular vote. It is to be accountable to the people as a democratic process. But of course, there are many who look at the two words democratic socialist and who understand that, at least over the long haul, those two words are not compatible. Nonetheless, it is Interesting that he's now using capital D, smaller case S. But he's still identifying very much as a democratic socialist. He said he was elected as a democratic socialist and he will lead as a democratic socialist. One of the things we need to remember here is that any form of socialism is based upon a social ownership of the major engines of the economy. And so whether that comes by democratic means or in communism or by absolute collectivism in terms of government power, the reality is that socialism means that the public is gaining control of, if not total ownership of, the engines of production. Now, that becomes very interesting when in his audacity, self declared, the new mayor said this, quote, we will replace the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism. End quote. Just consider that juxtaposition, the frigidity of individualism on the one hand and the warmth of collectivism on the other. Now, I think some of the apologists for the new mayor are arguing that he used the word collectivism in terms merely of collective action, joint democratic social action. But this is a smart man. He has to know exactly what he's doing. And that is in the manuscript of his address. So it is not an accident he uses the term collectivism. And anyone with an historical memory needs to think of Bolshevik revolutions, communist insurgencies. We need to think about the absolute crushing poverty, the bone crushing poverty, the soul destroying autocracy of the Soviet Union. Collectivism is collectivism. That means collective control, collective management, and it means ultimately collective ownership of the major engines of the economy. Now, there are those who say he really doesn't intend to take it that far. But the point is, he used the term collectivism and he added before it the word warmth, the warmth of collectivism. That is one of the most chilling combinations I've heard in a very long time. He has to know exactly what he's saying. That's what makes it even more dangerous. Now, in his version of collectivism, at least the one he ran on, you have this democratic socialist candidate now, the mayor who's made promises that there will be in New York City, universal, free childcare, free bus rides, increased rent controls, higher taxes on the wealthy. And I would put it this way, peace on earth and goodwill among men. And of course, given the gender fluidity to which he is absolutely committed to, that word means virtually anything you want it to mean. Almost as if designing his own parable, Zoram Mandani ran in his campaign for mayor of New York City, at least in part, on a platform of government owned and government managed grocery stores. Now, as someone who grew up with a family in that business, I can tell you that there is nothing more frightening than the idea of a government grocery store. Historians will tell you exactly what that looked like in Moscow, what it looks like right now in Havana. The idea that the government can run something like a grocery store more efficiently than the private sector. That is a fever dream that doesn't deserve any attention. But, you know, he was elected mayor of New York City. He now has incredible authority to bring about at least something approximating many of his goals. It's going to take a lot of money. It's going to take more money than New York City has. It's going to take more money than New York City can ever gained by any form of taxation. Furthermore, it's setting the stage for a lot of wealthy people in New York to leave the city, because after all, the wealthy always have options. It's going to be the people stuck in the city who are going to be stuck with the bills. Before leaving the inauguration of Zoram Mandani, a couple of other things have to be mentioned. And in moral terms, both of them are urgent. One of them is antisemitism. One of the scary things about this first Muslim mayor of New York City is the fact that his antisemitism has been pretty much right out in the open. And he claims that it's not anti Semitism because he is not, he says, opposed to the Jewish people. He is, however, opposed to Israel as a Jewish state. He has openly identified with the Palestinian cause. And as I say, he's had family connections to that cause for a long time. He has made statements about arresting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he were to appear in New York City to speak at the United Nations. By the way, the mayor of New York City does not have that authority. It is the attitude, it is the ideology that is scary here. And one of the actions he took, indeed two of the earliest actions the new mayor took were, number one, to remove strictures against divestment from Israel when it comes to the city's business. The second thing was he withdrew the city from an international definition of antisemitism that clearly acknowledged the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state. Now, if you withdraw that support, and by the way, he tried to camouflage this by saying he was withdrawing all executive actions undertaken once his predecessor had been indicted in office. There's no legal or constitutional basis for that. There's no fig leaf, really, to disguise what's going on here. It is open antisemitism. And the state of Israel responded almost immediately to his inauguration and those actions with the statement that they understood exactly what the new mayor's intention was. The other thing to mention are really two other big issues. Number one, his social liberalism, and the same time, the fact that he is openly identified as a Muslim. Okay, so what is the problem here? Well, the problem here, number one, is the fact that Zoram Mandani took the oath of office with his hand on the Quran. And let me just state this. We don't have time to follow this out with great detail, but the civilization produced by the Quran is not the civilization produced by the Bible. The civilization produced by the Bible is represented by the fact that American presidents have long put their hand on the Bible as they've taken the oath of office. It's an acknowledgement of the biblical principles and the Christian background to Western civilization. The Islamic civilization is very different. Just look at the Islamic dominated world. Just look at Muslim lands today. Look at Quranic rule, understand what is in the Quran, and understand that it is not mere symbolism that the newly elected mayor of New York City put his hand on on the Quran. By the way, he put his hand on the Quran at the same time that his social liberalism becomes such a big issue. By social liberalism, I mean Zoram Mandani is liberal in just about every way you can imagine. He is a leftist. He identifies with what's often called progressivism, leftist ideas, absolutely saturated with critical theory and absolutely committed to the LGBTQ cause. And let's just state that that cause lacks virtually any Quranic support. Let's put it another way, an Islamic society ordered by the Quran would take a very different, indeed contradictory understanding to those issues than Zoram Mandani. His Islamic identity is, let's just say, considerably out of sync with the actual Muslim world. But this just demonstrates that the political left loves anyone who claims a religious identity that to them doesn't matter in terms of continuity with the tradition. So they're not bothered really by a liberal person who identifies with Christianity in terms of family heritage, who puts his hand or her hand on the Bible to take the oath of office. Because the left knows it really doesn't matter when it comes to Zoram Mandani. It matters as symbolism. It matters as pluralism. But let's just state the left would not support Zoram Mandani if he actually intended to legislate the Quran. That needs to be kept in mind. One final big observation about Zoram Mandani is that he represents in many ways the future of the Democratic Party, at least in the hopes of those who supported him. Remember all those young supporters, an entire army of young supporters who went on and got signatures and then they rallied support and they got people to the polls. There is the excitement among Democrats that Zeram Mandani might be a symbol of great things to come. But the thing to note here is that that will require toppling the current establishment in the Democratic Party and putting in place an establishment that's actually considerably further to the left. And that's the destiny the Democratic Party is represented by Zahra Mandani. It's not just a little bit of movement to the left. It's not just a slow movement to the left. It is a fast, long jump to the left. And if that happens, it presents a great opportunity for Republicans. Republicans may blow the opportunity, but the distinctions between conservative and liberal, traditional and progressivist, Republican and Democratic visions for this country, those are likely to be very starkly revealed. Whether he intends it this way or not, Mayor Mandani is likely to help make the ideological choices presented to American voters all the more clear. Now Mayor Mamdani is barred from running for the White House precisely because he was born outside the United States. It's going to be interesting to see what Democratic candidate or candidates tries to pick up a Mandani esque kind of Persona and platform and policies and run for the White House. That's going to make 2028 extremely interesting. And when it comes to Mamdani, the fact is he has shifted the party to the left. I think there are figures who know this, including figures such as the Democratic leader in the Senate, New York Senator Chuck Schumer. When it comes to the future of the Democratic Party in the eyes of some like Zoram Mandani, Chuck Schumer doesn't have a place in the picture. But finally, speaking of a changing political picture, how about the changing political picture in the state of Minnesota? Tim Walz, two term governor, was running for a third term. Unprecedented, but constitutionally possible in Minnesota. He was known to be somewhat ambivalent about running for a third term, but he decided to do so largely because of the encouragement of his own party. But now his own party once basically to be done with him. Things can change in politics very, very quickly. Tim Walls announced yesterday that he is withdrawing from the race. He said that he cannot simultaneously run for a third term and serve the people of Minnesota. And of course, the background to this is an enormous corruption scandal that is threatening virtually the entire structure of Minnesota state politics, in particular with the Democratic farm labor, the DFL party, that's the name by which the Democratic Party goes in the state of Minnesota. Tim Walls is basically now politically ruined. Very quickly. It shows you what can happen when this kind of corruption scandal breaks out. But it is really interesting to see how some of the political observers, for instance, at the Washington Post, the Washington Post itself says that Tim Walls couldn't survive the scrutiny, the political scrutiny that came with being the 2024 floor vice presidential nominee of the Democratic Party. And you can notice that there's a good argument to be made here. The editors of the Washington Post say that Tim Walls problems go back to the fact that he really wasn't that outstanding a candidate. His record wasn't really so secure as was claimed. And when things began to fall apart, well, this is the way it works in politics. The party that was pushing you to run for a third term pretty quickly decides that it really needs to be without you. Fast. In its summary statement, the editorial board of the Washington Post wrote, quote, turns out being the Democratic nominee for vice president in 2024 was the worst thing that ever happened to Walz's political career. End quote. Now, all of this also brings up the inner workings of the Democratic Party, and in particular, the inner workings and the thinking of the Democratic ticket headed by Kamala Harris, then vice president of the United states in the 2024 race. And so the Washington Post, which didn't have to do this, draws up the fact that in her memoir about the campaign, Kamala Harris goes on to complain that Tim Walls wasn't her first choice. Now, this is not just to pile on Tim Walls, who, by the way, deserves it simply because of his liberal progressivist positions when it comes to things such as abortion, when it comes to LGBTQ issues, and even when it comes to children and teenagers and LGBTQ issues, Tim Walls is wall to wall, progressivist, liberal, absolutely sold out to those agendas. He is someone who's been defiant of the moral order from the get go in terms of his political career, particularly as the governor of Minnesota. But it is really interesting to note that in politics, there's something like an iron law, and that is that when you're going up, things always look good and then better and then better. But when you're going down, and sometimes you can go down fast, hour by hour, if not minute by minute, things just look worse. Now, remember, once again, the editorial I'm citing is from the Washington Post. It's not found in a conservative newspaper. But consider this paragraph, quote, speaking of how he was presented in the 2024 race, quote, his actual governing record was more troubling than his verbal flubs, as rampant welfare fraud in Minnesota has resulted in a cascade of federal indictments. Walz has insisted that he was focused all along on cleaning up fraud. And then this line, consider this, the editors wrote, quote, if that's true, he's really bad at cleaning up fraud because the problem exploded under his governorship, end quote. Now, that's another issue we will have to discuss, and it goes back to Mayor Mamdani's inaugural address and his idea of big government with big money and an even bigger government with even more money. What you see, such as the scandal in the state of Minnesota, is the fact that when you add all that together, you also end up with even greater opportunities and absolute assurance of fraud and corruption. It's not to say that doesn't happen in the private sector. It is to say when it happens in the public sector. It is very difficult to get anyone to take responsibility and it's very, very difficult to clean it up. Once you throw this kind of money into those programs, it is virtually impossible to avoid the fraud, the graft, the corruption. But that takes us back to where we started, big government. It turns out to come with lots of promises, even audacious promises. The problem is the reality and the bills that surely come. Christians looking at this kind of political landscape, any political landscape, understand that huge biblical worldview issues are always at stake when it comes to corruption. We understand the exceeding sinfulness of sin, as the Puritans put it. We also understand what the Scripture says about sin. Seizing the opportunity, you fuel big government. You create the opportunities for big corruption. Lots of things we'll consider in future days and weeks, even the months ahead, in the 2026 edition of the Briefing. For now, this is enough for one day. Thanks so much for listening to the Briefing. For more information, go to my website@albertmohler.com you can follow me at x or Twitter by going to x.comalbertmohler for information on the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, go to spts.edu. for information on Boyce College, just go to boycecollege.com I'm speaking to you from Davenport, Florida, and I'll meet you again tomorrow. The Briefing.