Defeating Zohran Mamdani: The Case for the Middle

My wife is probably the most balanced woman I know. She’s a professional psychotherapist who began working at nineteen and never paused for a single day, until the birth of our child. From that moment on, she showed me what it means to be a woman in the most profound, life-giving way. She saturated our home with love, poured that love into our child every day, and embodied the role of mother without hesitation, excuse, or complaint. Motherhood transformed her. It changed her sense of self, pulled her away from career dreams, and narrowed her social circle. It cost her something real. But in her own words, the cost was nothing compared to the joy of being there, present, attentive, intentional, every minute of every day for our child.

I tried to convince her to send him to daycare, just for a few hours a week, so she could have space to rest or reengage professionally. We even toured a few preschools. But she never went through with it. Her response was: "Going back to work and leaving him with someone else isn’t a relief, it’s the burden. Being with him is the gift." She also made sure I didn’t feel forgotten. Even when I was drowning in the chaos of work, global events, and life transitions, she didn’t demand more from me. She could have. Culturally, politically, she had every justification to hold me accountable or pull away. But instead, she covered for me when I was unavailable. She carried the weight without bitterness or resentment.

My wife is not a feminist, yet, she is one of the most powerful women I know, a force capable of reshaping worlds if she so desired. If something were to happen to me, I have absolute confidence that she would rise to the occasion, taking the reins of our family with a competence that rivals any man's. She could provide, protect, lead; she possesses the skills, the intellect, the resilience to do everything traditionally ascribed to the male role. But she chooses not to. Not because she lacks the ability, but because she understands that blurring those roles doesn't liberate; it disrupts the delicate harmony that sustains a family. She lets the man fulfill his role as the leader, the one who charts the course and shoulders the external storms, while she embodies the pillar, the unshakeable foundation upon which everything stands.

This isn't subjugation; it's synergy. She doesn't confuse the roles out of fear or tradition, but from a deep realization that a healthy family isn't a arena for competition, where husband and wife battle for dominance like gladiators in an endless fight. No, it's a partnership where each complements the other, their strengths interlocking like pieces of a divine puzzle. In this complementarity, there is no weakness, only amplified power, a union that weathers life's tempests with grace. Her choice is unapologetic, a bold stand against the tide that insists equality means sameness, proving instead that true equity flourishes in distinction.

My wife stands resolutely in the middle of the spectrum, that healthy, fertile ground where sanity prevails and extremes fade into irrelevance. She acknowledges, without hesitation or dilution, the historical truths that men, throughout the ages, have oppressed women, marginalizing them, denying them agency, and confining them to roles that stifled their potential. Yet, she also sees the danger in the pendulum's overcorrection, the radical feminist movements that propelled society from one end of the spectrum to the other, bypassing the balanced center entirely. What began as a necessary push for equality devolved into an erasure of distinctions, a war on the very roles that give life structure and meaning. This overcorrection hasn't freed women; it's isolated them further, confusing liberation with isolation from the complementary dynamics that enrich existence.

250 Broadway, New York

Feminism, born as a necessary revolt against genuine tyranny, has morphed into a radical doctrine that rejects biology, tradition, and complementarity. It views gender not as a natural duality but as a construct imposed by power structures, patriarchy, religion, colonialism. In this worldview, influenced by critical theory's binary lens of oppressor and oppressed, everything must be deconstructed. Men are perpetual villains, women eternal victims. Roles blur not for liberation but for destruction: the family unit, once a bastion of stability, is dismissed as a patriarchal invention; motherhood is reframed as a trap rather than a triumph.

This overcorrection stems from a deeper cultural plague: critical theory, which reduces the world to power dynamics. Pioneered by thinkers like Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida, it posits that all meanings, gender, identity, truth, are socially constructed by the powerful to subjugate the weak. The "centers of power" include the male, the white, the Christian, the Jew, the capitalist, the Western nation, even God Himself. These must be dismantled for "liberation." Women must revolt against men; the colonized against the colonizer; the poor against the rich. Israel, as a symbol of Western success in a failed region, becomes the ultimate oppressor, while Palestinians are romanticized as pure victims.

The result is a snap from one tyranny to another. Where once women were marginalized, now men suffocate under MeToo's blanket accusations, forced to atone for ancestral sins. White individuals must bear perpetual guilt, silenced in discussions of race. Western nations, despite their innovations in democracy, science, and human rights, are branded eternal colonialists. Success itself becomes suspect: the powerful are always wrong, the weak always right. Truth dissolves into relativism; identity fragments into 200 genders, leaving generations adrift in confusion.

This culture, obsessed with dismantling every structure built by traditional power, has found in Islam a convenient ally. Islam’s civilizational stagnation, caused by its own theological rigidity, has left it defeated, and being non-Western, and "brown", made it a combination that, in the eyes of the radical left, as the ultimate oppressed victim. As a result, Islam is enlisted as a comrade in the crusade against the true centers of power: the white, the male, the Christian, the capitalist, the Western. In this narrative, Israel stands as everything Islam is not, successful, resilient, a flourishing outpost of modernity amid chaos. For that very reason, it is vilified, as a symbol of whiteness, Western imperialism, Christian dominance, and colonial entitlement. In this distorted moral framework, Israel becomes the archetypal villain, a stand-in for all that must be obliterated in the name of “justice.”

This is the poisonous worldview nurtured in the home of Mahmood Mamdani, the father of Zohran Mamdani the mayoral candidate in NYC.[1] It is a philosophy that casts America as the “Great Satan,” and attributes Islamic terrorism not to the Islamic theology or supremacist doctrines, but to the American imperialistic policies. It reframes 9/11 as a predictable response to imperial overreach. Suicide bombings are reframed as political statements, stripped of their theological motivations, and even rape is perversely rationalized as a tool of anti-colonial resistance. At its core, this ideology envisions a “globalized intifada”, a worldwide violent uprising where the oppressed are glorified for annihilating their oppressors. This is why the activists cheer for Hamas, because Hamas does what they fantasize about.

This is the same ideological virus that fuels calls to defund the police because they are seen as foot soldiers of the oppressor class. In this worldview, law enforcement is not a mechanism of order, but a weapon wielded by white, Western, male, capitalist power to maintain its grip on society. The nation-state itself is reframed as a colonial construct, a geographic lie imposed by imperial powers to enshrine privilege and restrict the movement of the oppressed. Borders, like gender or truth, are to be deconstructed. Laws are violence. Sovereignty is oppression. And anyone who defends these structures is labeled a fascist, a reactionary, a defender of the “old world” they are determined to burn to the ground.

If Zohran Mamdani enters the New York City Hall at 250 Broadway, it will be the institutionalization of an ideology that sees American power as inherently evil, Western civilization as a colonial crime, and Judeo-Christian values as systems of oppression to be dismantled. Mamdani inherits a worldview rooted in the radical rejection of the very foundations that built New York into the capital of modernity. His rise to power would mark the mainstreaming of a philosophy that dreams of tearing down law enforcement, diluting national identity, and absolving jihadist terror under the guise of resistance. Public schools will be hijacked to indoctrinate children into viewing themselves through the lens of victimhood and grievance. capitalism will be portrayed as theft. Under Mamdani’s ideological regime, justice will be inverted, where success is a mark of guilt, and criminality a badge of resistance.

The Case for The Middle

The middle is where clarity lives. It is where truth is not bent to fit narratives or manipulated to preserve comfort. It doesn’t flinch under the weight of political correctness or ideological pressure. It doesn’t care who’s offended. What critical theory poisons, the middle restores. Where it sees oppression in design, the middle sees order. Where it cries for deconstruction, the middle builds. Where it brands all strength as abuse, the middle distinguishes between tyranny and responsibility. And where it tears down the very concept of truth, the middle insists: truth is not a construct. It is not whiteness. It is not colonialism. It is not Christian supremacy. It is what it is, unbending, clear, uncomfortable, but necessary for civilization to stand.

This is the posture my wife embodies. She isn’t some relic of patriarchal indoctrination. She chose a life the world no longer honors, and in doing so, she exposed the bankruptcy of an ideology that calls motherhood slavery and femininity weakness. Her clarity is revolutionary. And so is mine. Because I, too, stand in the middle. And that is why I expose the threat of Islam. Both ends of the spectrum have abandoned that clarity. The radical left has collapsed into a worldview that filters everything through power and victimhood, making Islam untouchable because of its position in the narrative hierarchy. Meanwhile, the fearful right attempts to sidestep confrontation by isolating “Islamism” as the problem, preserving the illusion that Islam itself is benign. Both responses are dishonest, and dangerous.

The middle does not submit to either. The middle does not care for appeasement or overcorrection. The middle reads the Qur’an and the hadiths. It understands the concept of dar al-Islam and dar al-harb. It knows that Muhammad was not just a prophet but a warlord, that Sharia is not a spiritual guide but a total system of governance. The middle sees clearly that the threat is not a few extremists but the theological machinery that produces them, generation after generation. And it dares to say so. Exposing the truth about Islam is not bigotry. It is not “Islamophobia.” It is intellectual integrity. And only from the middle can such integrity be practiced, because only the middle is free from ideological captivity. It has no need to protect Islam to prove it’s tolerant. It has no need to demonize Muslims to feel superior. It simply tells the truth and prepares accordingly.

This is the same middle that sees the threat of Zohran Mamdani. A man raised on grievance theory, schooled in critical ideology, and formed within a religious tradition that has historically fused theology with political power. He now stands on the doorstep of institutional influence in the capital of the modern world. Mamdani is the embodiment of both distortions, and his rise is the natural result of a culture that rewards grievance and punishes clarity. His success would not just mark a shift in political priorities, it would represent the normalization of an ideology that undermines the very structures that made a city like New York possible in the first place.

This is why the middle matters now more than ever. Not the shallow center that tries to please everyone. Not the neutral zone that avoids hard questions. But the clear-headed, fact-based, truth-telling middle, where ideas are tested, not protected. Where doctrine is examined. Where ideologies are not judged by their intentions, but by their outcomes. Where Islam is neither protected from scrutiny nor distorted by ignorance. Where civilization is not something to apologize for, but something to defend.

---

[1] Mamdani, Mahmood. Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, the Cold War, and the Roots of Terror. New York: Pantheon Books, 2004.

---