Zohran Mamdani’s election victory as mayor of New York City has been one of the most significant political developments in the U.S. and, indeed, worldwide in recent memory. Among its many implications for how politics can and will be conducted in the years ahead, one certainly stands out: Mamdani’s achievement represents what American linguist Noam Chomsky once termed "a threat to stability posed by a good example.” In fact, the good example in this case seems to have already been taken up by the Green Party of England and Wales. Zack Polanski, the rising star of left-wing politics in Britain, is similarly surging in popularity, and his movement might actually become the main challenger to a prospective Reform U.K. government.

Yet not all who celebrated Mamdani’s victory did so on principle. Self-styled "political consultant” and journalist Paul Mason, who played a crucial role in destroying any possibility of a meaningful opposition to the right-wing establishment in Britain, rushed to celebrate Mamdani’s win as though their political convictions were fully aligned. However, if Mamdani were running for mayor of London on the same platform, as everyone who pays attention already knows, Mason would be the first to attack him, probably on the grounds of his "anti-Semitism” or maybe even for his "jihadism.”

This is not an isolated phenomenon, of course, and it reveals two broader tendencies. The first is a natural inclination to attach oneself to the winning side. Everyone wants to be able to say that they support what is clearly popular with the people. The second, perhaps more telling, is that symbolic endorsement is cost-free. It is far easier to stand with someone whose triumph demands nothing of you – to offer sincere support, perhaps, but entirely without consequence. And, more importantly, it requires no serious consideration of whether you would actually endorse the same candidate if they were to rule over you.

A similar phenomenon occurred a year ago when the leader of the Workers’ Party of Türkiye (TIP), Erkan Baş, posed for a picture with former Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn when the latter stood for re-election as an independent lawmaker. In reality, Baş and Corbyn had virtually nothing in common, since TİP, despite its name, would be considered really a far-right party by the standards of British politics. After all, its main focus has been the supposed "threat of Sharia law coming to Türkiye," a delusional concern shared by the fiercest opponents of both Corbyn and Mamdani.

Adopting the posture of solidarity at a distance in this way seems to have become a habit of contemporary politicians. It is the easiest way to appear principled without ever having to test those principles against local reality. The struggles of others become moral accessories used to decorate an otherwise timid politics, as it were. In this context, Mamdani’s victory is useful precisely because it is foreign and not because those who celebrate it today would actually challenge the dogmas prevalent in their own societies. Some of the reactions to Mamdani’s statements from years ago indicate this.

How, then, can one apply the lesson locally? It is instructive to look at what Mamdani said when he was asked, in a now-famous (or infamous) televised debate during the Democratic primary campaign, where he would visit first if he were elected mayor. Each of his opponents had predictably chosen Israel, and some added Ukraine, whereas Mamdani said that he would stay in New York to serve the people of that city. Perhaps it would be wiser for "aspiring left-wingers” around the world to embrace the same attitude – namely, to be determined to work for their own people, instead of those who pay the proverbial piper. If the point is not simply imitation but integrity, "the good example” can only be pursued by the same kind of autonomy Mamdani claimed for his city, free from the pull of external approval or imported agendas.