London Mayor Sadiq Khan has waded into New York politics,urging voters in Queens to reject “the politics of fear” and back progressive Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani in a closely watched Democratic primary. In remarks reported by Byline Times, Khan – one of the most prominent Muslim politicians in the West – framed the race as part of a wider global struggle over how cities respond to rising populism, Islamophobia, and economic insecurity. His intervention, rare for a sitting foreign mayor, underscores both Mamdani’s growing profile on the American left and the extent to which local contests in New York are increasingly seen as battlegrounds in a broader ideological fight.
Sadiq Khan’s Message to New York Why a London Mayor Is Weighing In on a Queens Race
When the Mayor of London records a video for a state assembly race across the Atlantic, it signals that this contest is about more than just one Queens district. Sadiq Khan’s intervention reflects a growing transatlantic front against the far right’s playbook of division,scapegoating and misinformation. Drawing on his own experience of being targeted by demagogues-from Donald Trump to UK populists-Khan is effectively telling New Yorkers that he has seen this movie before, and it ends badly for diverse, working-class communities. His message aligns with a broader pattern: urban centres around the world are becoming laboratories for inclusive, progressive governance, while also serving as primary targets for culture-war campaigns designed to roll back that progress.
By spotlighting Zohran Mamdani, Khan is underscoring that the stakes in Queens echo debates in London, Paris, and Berlin about who gets to belong in rapidly changing cities. The London Mayor is betting that voters in Astoria and Jackson Heights will recognize familiar tactics of fear-mongering and push back with a coalition grounded in solidarity. His appeal implicitly contrasts two starkly different political offers: one rooted in anxiety and resentment, and another grounded in shared prosperity and mutual respect. That contrast can be seen in the way each side talks about issues like housing, policing and migration:
- Housing: framing tenants as a threat vs. treating housing as a right
- Policing: more force and surveillance vs. accountability and community safety
- Migration: blaming newcomers vs. investing in integration and opportunity
| City | Leader | Key Message |
|---|---|---|
| London | Sadiq Khan | Reject fear, back diversity |
| New York | Zohran Mamdani (Queens) | Organize for housing and justice |
From Islamophobia to Public Safety How The Politics of Fear Shapes Local Campaigns
In Queens, as in many cities across the West, coded rhetoric about “security” and “law and order” often functions as a socially acceptable stand-in for older, more explicit forms of bigotry. Campaign mailers and late-night TV ads rarely mention religion directly, yet headlines about “foreign influence,” “radical ideologies,” or “unpatriotic dissent” are clearly aimed at Muslim candidates and their allies. This is the terrain on which Zohran Mamdani is forced to campaign: a landscape where Islamophobia is laundered through concerns about crime, policing, and urban disorder. The stakes are sharpened when high-profile figures like Sadiq Khan weigh in, using their own experience of being racialised and securitised to draw a line between legitimate debate and the weaponisation of fear for electoral gain.
- “Security” narratives deployed to question a candidate’s loyalty
- Selective outrage over protests, particularly those involving Muslim or Arab communities
- Policy distortion, painting housing or transit reforms as threats to neighbourhood stability
- Background scrutiny that treats immigrant roots as a risk factor
| Campaign Theme | Fear-Based Spin | Reality Check |
|---|---|---|
| Community Safety | Muslim officials will “defund protection” | Focus on mental health, housing, and youth services |
| Foreign Policy Stances | Support for Palestine equals extremism | Rooted in human rights and international law |
| Immigrant Rights | “Open borders” threaten local security | Regularisation and labor protections reduce exploitation |
This narrowing of public debate reduces complex policy questions to binary choices: safety versus chaos, loyalty versus treachery, “real Americans” versus risky outsiders. The pattern is familiar to Khan, who has faced attacks linking him to terrorism simply by virtue of his faith and background, and it echoes in the scrutiny of Mamdani’s advocacy for tenants, migrants and Palestinians. By foregrounding these parallels, Khan is not merely endorsing a fellow politician; he is challenging New Yorkers to recognise when civic anxieties are being stage-managed for partisan advantage. The decision for voters, then, is not just between candidates, but between two models of politics: one that stokes suspicion of Muslim public figures, and another that insists public safety is best served by inclusion, accountability and facts rather than mythologies of menace.
Zohran Mamdani’s Record on Housing Justice and Transit Equity A Closer Look at the Stakes
Across Astoria and western Queens, Mamdani has treated housing not as an abstract talking point but as a daily emergency reshaping people’s lives. He has been a leading voice behind Good Cause Eviction protections, pushing to limit arbitrary rent hikes and unjust displacements, and has made fully funded public and social housing central to his agenda. His office is known for turning legislative fights into neighborhood campaigns, linking tenants in walk-up buildings, NYCHA residents and rent-stabilized households into a shared coalition. On the ground, that has translated into concrete organizing tools rather than slogans:
- Tenant clinics connecting residents with lawyers and organizers
- Door-to-door outreach in buildings facing harassment or mass non-renewals
- Language-accessible materials for immigrant renters navigating complex legal notices
- Direct pressure on negligent landlords through coordinated tenant associations
| Issue | Mamdani’s Approach | Who Benefits |
|---|---|---|
| Evictions | Stronger tenant protections | Renters at risk of displacement |
| Transit Fares | Lower-cost, fairer pricing | Low-income commuters |
| Service Cuts | Opposition to austerity | Outer-borough riders |
On transit, Mamdani has framed the subway and bus network as a civil right for a city that runs on shift work, caregiving and late-night labour. He has championed fully funded, reliable service, pushed to protect bus routes that wealthier districts rarely notice, and argued for fairer fare structures that don’t punish those who live furthest from Manhattan’s job centers. His advocacy sits at the intersection of class and race: riders in Queens endure some of the longest commutes in the United States, and any increase in fares or cuts in service falls hardest on Black, Brown and immigrant communities. In elevating these struggles, Mamdani is not merely contesting a seat in Albany; he is contesting a model of urban governance in which austerity and landlord power are treated as inevitabilities rather than political choices.
What New Yorkers Can Do Countering Fear Based Narratives at the Ballot Box
In a city accustomed to crisis, fear has become a lazy substitute for policy.New Yorkers can push back by treating every campaign message like an evidence test,not an emotional trigger. When a leaflet, ad or debate line links immigration, policing or housing to a vague sense of danger, voters can ask: What specific policy is being proposed? Who benefits financially or politically? Where is the data? Instead of rewarding candidates who shout the loudest about crime or “disorder,” residents can elevate those who publish concrete plans, costings and timelines.That shift in attention-away from rhetoric, towards detail-weakens the incentive for consultants and power brokers to lean on scare tactics.
- Seek out local forums rather than relying on attack ads.
- Read campaign literature critically, highlighting claims that lack sources.
- Track voting records to see whether past actions match today’s alarmist slogans.
- Support community-led media that fact-checks narratives about crime, migration and public spending.
| Fear Tactic | Voter Response |
|---|---|
| “Your neighborhood isn’t safe anymore” | Check precinct data and demand sources |
| “Reform means chaos” | Ask for examples from comparable cities |
| “They’ll raise your taxes” | Look for actual budget proposals |
At the ballot box, the most powerful rebuke to fear-based messaging is an informed, turnout-heavy electorate. That means New Yorkers not only casting their own ballots but also ensuring neighbors understand how to navigate registration deadlines, early voting and ranked-choice ballots-systems that can be exploited by campaigns eager to confuse and suppress participation. By volunteering as poll watchers, joining voter-protection hotlines, or even just sharing clear election information in building group chats, residents can blunt the impact of misinformation. When voters show up with facts, solidarity and a clear sense of shared stakes, candidates who rely on division and panic quickly discover that fear is a losing strategy in a city that refuses to be intimidated.
In Retrospect
As New York prepares for another pivotal primary, Khan’s intervention underlines how closely watched these local contests have become-and how sharply they are seen to reflect a broader ideological clash within Western democracies. Whether Mamdani’s message of tenant protections, public investment and international solidarity prevails over a more cautious, security-first narrative will be decided at the ballot box.
For now, Khan’s appeal serves as both endorsement and warning: that the language used to define safety, identity and belonging can either entrench division or offer a route out of it. New Yorkers, he suggests, are not just choosing a representative for Astoria, but signalling what kind of politics they are willing to accept-and what kind they are prepared to reject.
