So in terms of criticism, do youse all think there would be a way for him to fully not have anyone who is a Zionist in his administration? If so, how?
This is not my main problem here, my main problem is “I will hire some zionists, and some of them I will know are zionists when hiring them”. I think “don’t say you’ll knowingly hire nazis” is a low bar for me to set in order to not be disappointed in a socialist candidate.
I literally dont know because Zionism is so deeply embedded everywhere.
I know for me I have worked with Zionists and Nazis and I have no choice in the matter. I could never say “I won’t work with Zionists or Nazis”.
I think there is selection pressure that those people move up in ranks. so if you are looking at the pool of available people to hire for a senior position, are there enough candidates who are able willing and available to fill the jobs? Knowing that they might personally get a lot of backlash for even taking the job under that circumstance. Need to be both competent and brave.
If there are, then doesn’t it make sense to say “I’ll consider everyone” then just fill the positions with your people anyway?
And fr look how hard it is for a site like hexbear to find mods who never ever do anything that could be understood as Zionist. Making a statement that would leave his administration open to permanent struggle sessions seems like a bad idea.
He could also just not comment either way. If he said this same statement but he said “don’t worry, there will be klansmen in my administration” the reaction shouldn’t be “well of course, it would require a draconian level of oversight to enforce the alternative” the reaction should be “why tf are you saying that?”
Making a statement that would leave his administration open to permanent struggle sessions seems like a bad idea.
Then avoid the question, or say anything other than “I will hire nazis knowingly”. Just say “some of the people I hire might be nazis, I’m not giving everyone a political quiz” if you absolutely have to.
I don’t follow beat by beat but I think its been understood for a long time that he’s gonna have brad lander in there. And he has affirmed Zionism. This was all since before the primary even happened so there is no news.
I agree it would be better to have developed one of the smart ass deflections people find so cute. Maybe he reached the limit if his charm.
Or is it that there is no way to be mayor of NYC without that, so he shouldn’t become mayor because it requires capitulating immediately in this way?
Yeah pretty much. NYC is where Wall Street is located at after all. The heart of a heartless world. NYC should be seen as a final stronghold of capital where the bourgeoisie will make their last stand while the rest of the world has already become socialist.
I don’t really see much here that’s specific to NYC other than the fact that it’s newsworthy elsewhere. Do you think an overt platform of anti-zionism is an easy win everywhere else?
As Socialists we should shy away from what’s “easy” and work to push the masses towards our views. If anything Zohran should be getting more based since he has all but formally won this thing.
This is the most convincing comment in the whole thread!
At this moment he can do fucking anything and still win because there is zero viable opposition. He should be putting the pedal to the metal setting up the mandate upon which he wins.
Given how unusual it is to have such incredibly weak opposition, he has such a unique opportunity to frame his victory to be on any basis he chooses.
So in terms of criticism, do youse all think there would be a way for him to fully not have anyone who is a Zionist in his administration? If so, how?
And does there exist a full slate of qualified non Zionists to fill every position? That would be a cool article for someone in NYC to write.
Or is it that there is no way to be mayor of NYC without that, so he shouldn’t become mayor because it requires capitulating immediately in this way?
This is not my main problem here, my main problem is “I will hire some zionists, and some of them I will know are zionists when hiring them”. I think “don’t say you’ll knowingly hire nazis” is a low bar for me to set in order to not be disappointed in a socialist candidate.
So you think it would be possible?
I literally dont know because Zionism is so deeply embedded everywhere.
I know for me I have worked with Zionists and Nazis and I have no choice in the matter. I could never say “I won’t work with Zionists or Nazis”.
I think there is selection pressure that those people move up in ranks. so if you are looking at the pool of available people to hire for a senior position, are there enough candidates who are able willing and available to fill the jobs? Knowing that they might personally get a lot of backlash for even taking the job under that circumstance. Need to be both competent and brave.
If there are, then doesn’t it make sense to say “I’ll consider everyone” then just fill the positions with your people anyway?
And fr look how hard it is for a site like hexbear to find mods who never ever do anything that could be understood as Zionist. Making a statement that would leave his administration open to permanent struggle sessions seems like a bad idea.
He could also just not comment either way. If he said this same statement but he said “don’t worry, there will be klansmen in my administration” the reaction shouldn’t be “well of course, it would require a draconian level of oversight to enforce the alternative” the reaction should be “why tf are you saying that?”
Then avoid the question, or say anything other than “I will hire nazis knowingly”. Just say “some of the people I hire might be nazis, I’m not giving everyone a political quiz” if you absolutely have to.
This is an unforced error.
I don’t follow beat by beat but I think its been understood for a long time that he’s gonna have brad lander in there. And he has affirmed Zionism. This was all since before the primary even happened so there is no news.
I agree it would be better to have developed one of the smart ass deflections people find so cute. Maybe he reached the limit if his charm.
Yeah pretty much. NYC is where Wall Street is located at after all. The heart of a heartless world. NYC should be seen as a final stronghold of capital where the bourgeoisie will make their last stand while the rest of the world has already become socialist.
I don’t really see much here that’s specific to NYC other than the fact that it’s newsworthy elsewhere. Do you think an overt platform of anti-zionism is an easy win everywhere else?
As Socialists we should shy away from what’s “easy” and work to push the masses towards our views. If anything Zohran should be getting more based since he has all but formally won this thing.
This is the most convincing comment in the whole thread!
At this moment he can do fucking anything and still win because there is zero viable opposition. He should be putting the pedal to the metal setting up the mandate upon which he wins.
Given how unusual it is to have such incredibly weak opposition, he has such a unique opportunity to frame his victory to be on any basis he chooses.
This is a time for strength not conciliation.
Groveling is a choice.