What Mamdani Reveals & Kuyper Predicted

In the wake of the NYC election that saw Zohran Mamdani elected mayor, there has been considerable commentary. While some of that commentary has come from those who live in NYC, most of the negative and, at times, vitriolic commentary has come from those outside of NYC. Numerous people have messaged me post-election, with those messages ranging from educated assessments and critiques of Mamdani's policies to outright ignorant bigotry. It's been fascinating. 

That said, I am not interested in evaluating here Mamdani or his policies, but to explore why many found hope in his election. To state my main argument upfront, the popularity of Mamdani and others like him, in part, stems from many Christian capitalists, historically and presently, having often abdicated their responsibility toward the vulnerable. 

Islam & Democratic Socialism  

Consider two characteristics of Mamdani that get all the attention: his Muslim faith and democratic socialism.(1) Many are dumbfounded that a man with those two characteristics could be so popular, not only in NYC but beyond. Though there was much consternation from some after his election, there were also exclamations of hope from many others. That response, I think, for some––conservative Christians, in particular––has been jarring.

While I am not a Muslim nor am I part of the democratic socialist party, I am, in fact, a conservative Christian. And yet I understand why there has been such a jubilant response to this Muslim democratic socialist. Again, I think a major reason so many are celebrating the election of a Muslim democratic socialist is that, in sacralizing capitalism, many Christians have relinquished their responsibilities to the most vulnerable. For many, the teachings of Luke 4, Luke 6, James 5, and numerous other passages on just economic practices, or, for example, John Calvin’s sermons on Deuteronomy 24:14-22, are ignored or spiritualized. However, in doing so, a moral-theological vacuum has been created—one now being filled by those who are willing to place the marginalized at the center. This is not the first time this has happened. 

Relevant Critique from Kuyper

In the late 19th century, Abraham Kuyper lamented the same scenario. His thoughts are relevant for us today. Consider the following excerpt from a recent research project of mine, where I was theologically evaluating aspects of capitalism:

There was an emphasis on justice and equity at the heart of Kuyper’s social and economic ethic. Ultimately, his ethics center on those experiencing poverty, not on those capable of generating capital, which reverses many capitalist instincts. The fact that an abundance of resources is generated in a capitalist system that does not adequately distribute them reveals a fundamental brokenness in both the system itself and its proponents. For Kuyper, 

There is no excuse for a situation in which our Heavenly Father with divine generosity causes an abundance of food to come forth from the ground and that through our fault his bounty is distributed so unequally that while one person has more than enough to eat the other goes to bed with an empty stomach––if he even has a bed. And if there are people who want to defend such abuses by invoking––God forgive them––the words of Jesus, “for the poor you always have with you” (John 12:8), then out of respect for God's Holy Word, I must register protest against such a misuse of scripture.(2)

For Kuyper, “If the poor appeal to these words (John 12:8/Matthew 26:11) in order to comfort themselves––so be it. But those who have received a rich portion from God should take care never to use Jesus' words in order to excuse the hardness of their hearts, if you do this you only sin against your own soul.”(3) This hardness of heart is the fundamental reason why justice, equity, and centering of those experiencing poverty are often lacking. 

As a result, and to the main point of this article, for Kuyper, this lack of justice has come with a price. That price would become even more pronounced in the coming decades as Marxism and socialism rose in prominence. Kuyper was by no means a proponent of socialism, yet nonetheless, he was sympathetic to their cause. As has been argued, 

Kuyper claimed Christians ought to be “ashamed” and “humiliated” about their failure to lead in matters of justice pertaining to the working class…The socialists, according to Kuyper, had done a better job of invoking the name of Christ than Christians had in the fight against injustice, and when the Church finally decided to pay attention, it was on the defensive against powerful organized movements. 

Christians made strong and lasting contributions overall in the area of worker justice, and their movements have continued to develop, but they never led the way. Rather, they were provoked to respond, and much time was spent catching up with secular movements.(4)

Further, in a striking rebuke of those who created the capitalistic culture of his day, he said,

The situation has given rise to the socialist, communist, and the nihilist theories, which are a just punishment from God for the pride of owners who imagined that they could safeguard their mammon right apart from God. Those theories, absurd as they mostly are, do an excellent job of laying bare once again the foundations of society and of forcing humanity once more to reckon with promotional principles also as they apply to ownership. If you, happy owners of the moment, try to base your right of ownership apart from God and nothing but your human insight and your tradition and on what you consider necessary and imperative, we will give you gas as a consistent socialist will say––a taste of your own medicine. We, too, regulate the right of ownership apart from God, this time according to our insight and distinct tradition and in light of what we judge historically necessary and inevitable. Be warned, however, that we will regulate it in a way that is entirely different than yours! (5)

A Filled Vacuum

Though some might take issue with his framing of socialism, Kuyper is correct that capitalist Christians have too often abdicated their economic responsibilities before God and, as a result, others have filled the vacuum left by unfaithful Christians. Too frequently, Christians––like the socialists of Kuyper’s day–– have based their socio-economic lives “apart from God” and on “nothing but…human insight…and tradition.” In doing so, the standards and expectations that might have been present in Christian moral teachings are replaced by those of other religious moral systems. Some of these teachings will align with Christian teachings, and some will not. But in the end, Christians have made the bed they are now lying in by refusing to lead the way in being known for uplifting the vulnerable among us. 

One ought not be surprised that the rise and popularity of democratic socialists has come at the same time as a growing conflation of the Christian faith with a MAGA Christianity that venerates an administration and movement that is so often antithetical to the nature and character of Christ and His Kingdom. When self-proclaimed Christian capitalists who are in power protect the interests of the wealthy, demonize the vulnerable, use power for their own personal gain, and use Christianity as a justification, we should not be surprised when the response from many is to look elsewhere. Christians ought to be ashamed and humiliated that, in many ways, we are not currently known for leading in matters of justice for the vulnerable and that others are doing a more “excellent job of laying bare” the issues we face.

Final Thoughts 

All that said, my goal is not to defend democratic socialism (like every system, there are aspects Christians can affirm and other aspects we should reject), view democratic socialism as a judgment from God (even though Kuyper does make that case about socialism proper), nor flatten Kuyper's social/economic philosophy. Instead, the purpose is to remind us that wherever Christians neglect justice for the most vulnerable, others will fill the vacuum created. A faithful Christian witness requires us to recover a public ethic rooted in Scripture, attuned to structural sin, and genuinely centered on the vulnerable.

Ultimately, for those distraught by the way American Christianity is viewed right now, I think we must take seriously why there was a vacuum to be filled, rather than simply lamenting or combating who filled the void.  And maybe the socialists, or in this case, the democratic socialists, can help us do a “better job of invoking the name of Christ” when “fighting against injustice.”

Finally, I really do wish Mayor Mamdani all the best. He seems like a man of genuine conviction and integrity with a desire to care for the most vulnerable in our city, and I will do whatever I can to support those efforts. In the landscape of our political era, leaders of genuine conviction and integrity are desperately needed. I hope that proves to be the case with Mamdani. And, ultimately, in the coming days, I hope Christians are known more and more for our advocacy of the most vulnerable amongst us.

---

(1) Sidenote: For what it’s worth—and in case it needs to be stated—democratic socialism is not the same as socialism, and socialism is not the same as communism. These distinctions matter, and cutting through the rhetoric to understand them clearly is essential. Also, for the one of the summaries of these political ideologies from a Christian perspective, see Political Visions & Illusions by David Koyzis.

(2) Abraham Kuyper, Jordan J Ballor, and Melvin Flikkema, On Business & Economics (Bellingham: Lexham Press, 2021), 212

(3) Ibid, 45

(4) Kirstin Vander Giessen-Reitsma, “Christianity and Labour: Obstacles and Contributions in the Early Stages.” Comment Magazine, March 1, 2003. comment.org/christianity-and-labour-obstacles-and-contributions-in-the-early-stages/

(5) Abraham Kuyper, Jordan J Ballor, and Melvin Flikkema, On Business & Economics (Bellingham: Lexham Press, 2021), 51