[[link removed]]

FOR AMERICANS, 2026 STARTED WITH TWO STARKLY DIFFERENT VISIONS FOR
THE COUNTRY  
[[link removed]]


 

Moira Donegan
January 5, 2026
The Guardian
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Zohran Mamdani’s optimistic inauguration contrasted in every
single way with Trump’s brazen invasion of Venezuela _

Spectators braved wind chills in the teens to catch a glimpse of New
York Mayor Zohran Mamdani at his inauguration.,

 

The new year opened with a pair of scenes that illustrated the great
divide within the US and the stakes of the ongoing contest over its
future. On 1 January, in a star-studded inauguration ceremony of
uncommon pomp and optimism, Zohran Mamdani
[[link removed]], the 34-year-old
democratic socialist, was sworn in
[[link removed]]
as the new mayor of New York and delivered a speech
[[link removed]]
that declared the era of small government and centrist inhibition to
be over, and a new dawn
[[link removed]]
of ambitious social welfare programs to begin.

The new mayor’s inauguration is the culmination of a decade of
growth from the Democratic party’s insurgent left wing, and results
from a feat of organizing within the country’s largest city that
relied upon mass mobilization from downwardly mobile and economically
disenfranchised millennial and gen Z voters. It was hailed as a
generational shift in US politics
[[link removed]], inaugurating a new,
21st-century vision for the party.

And less than two days later, from his Mar-a-Lago resort, Donald Trump
[[link removed]], who was once
thought to represent a decisive shift for his own Republican party,
announced that his administration had carried out an action that
seemed characteristic of
[[link removed]]
the old, Bush-era past. An abrupt overseas bombing campaign
[[link removed]]
and the kidnapping
[[link removed]]
of a foreign head of state, Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro, were
facilitated without UN or congressional approval
[[link removed]],
in plain violation of international law and the US constitution. The
raid was meant to inaugurate a regime change in the South American
country and to facilitate a neocolonial-style mass theft of that
country’s oil
[[link removed]]
and mineral resources.

One project was produced by a massive grassroots organizing effort
[[link removed]];
the other was conducted with virtually no attempt to persuade the
public or manufacture consent. One promised greater dignity for
Americans; the other offered them only the pleasures of vicarious
domination and the infliction of suffering on faraway others. One
gestured toward the possibility of a new politics to produce a more
fair and optimistic future
[[link removed]].
The other was an eerie echo of that past, a violent pantomime of an
era of American imperial expansion that had long been declared over.
But both will reshape the domestic political contest that looms ahead:
the 2026 midterms.

They say that prediction is the lowest form of journalism, which of
course does not stop many journalists from engaging in it. But the
opening days of 2026 have rapidly reshaped the coming electoral
contests in November that will define American politics this year.

On the one hand, a young, insurgent left wing
[[link removed]]
will face the first major test of its ability to govern in executive
office, watched by the keen eye of a sometimes hostile national media
and a national electorate unsure of the left’s ability to govern.
And on the other, a diminished president – under the sway of a
neoconservative remnant in the form of secretary of state Marco Rubio
[[link removed]] – has turned to
military force in an effort to shore up his own popularity amid broken
promises, a struggling
[[link removed]]
economy and plummeting
[[link removed]] poll
numbers
[[link removed]].

Despite his solid victory in New York and his broad popularity with
younger voters, Mamdani will face an uphill battle in convincing
Americans that his approach to politics offers a viable future.
Meanwhile Republicans
[[link removed]], facing Trumpism’s
disastrous present, have returned to the most violent and foolhardy
ambitions of their past.

Because let’s be clear: Trump is pursuing regime change in Venezuela
[[link removed]] because he is
politically weak and he thinks, as struggling autocrats so often do,
that he can shore up his domestic popularity with a foreign military
adventure.

The past year was not a good one for Trump: his restoration to power
was initially met with widespread compliance, but he quickly destroyed
much of American soft power, both domestically and abroad; spoiled his
political capital in the US by deploying troops to major cities
[[link removed]]
and pursuing an ostentatiously sadistic mass deportation agenda
[[link removed]];
and presiding over an economy
[[link removed]]
that is struggling in every era except AI investment
[[link removed]]
– an unpopular industry whose products seemingly do little beside to
immiserate Americans’ lives and degrade their dignity.

His signature tariffs
[[link removed]] have hurt both
foreign relations and domestic consumer power; a struggle has emerged
within his coalition as his underlings and followers jockey for
position. There’s speculation
[[link removed]]
about
[[link removed]]
his
[[link removed]]
health
[[link removed]],
and he has been damaged by ongoing scandals relating to his close
association
[[link removed]]
with the dead financier and convicted sex trafficker, Jeffrey Epstein.
As 2025 drew to a close, the consensus was that his party was headed
toward a thrashing
[[link removed]]
in next year’s midterms.

From this position, Trump is probably hoping that he can rally
Americans around the flag by going to war. Rubio has a past
generation’s bloodlust for war and a shockingly naive belief –
contradicted by all evidence and bitter recent experience – in the
US military’s capacity to ensure a stable regime change abroad; he
seems to see Venezuela as a stepping stone to overthrowing
[[link removed]]
the government of Cuba, the birthplace of his parents.

Pete Hegseth [[link removed]], the
US defense secretary, has a vision of military action that appears
about as sophisticated as that of a child who has recently watched an
action movie and keeps making enthusiastic explosion noises that spray
his parents with spit.

They are stupid, cruel, petty men – men of great narcissism, little
intellect and no character. They have no plan for an exit; their minds
are empty except for their fantasies of glory and domination. They are
exactly who Trump will listen to. The White House seems to think that
this is the example that will persuade Americans to vote for
Republicans in November. I doubt it.

Meanwhile, the left’s new standard-bearer will be facing his own
challenges. Mamdani’s campaign centered three policy proposals
[[link removed]]:
rent freezes
[[link removed]]
on rent-stabilized unit’s in the city’s famously unaffordable
housing stock; free bus fares
[[link removed]];
and universal childcare
[[link removed]].
The campaign promises have the virtue of being precise, actionable and
measurable markers of progress and improved quality of life for
thousands of New Yorkers.

This is, ironically, also their liability: Mamdani’s promises were
so concrete that he has robbed himself of the opportunity to take a
politician’s favorite route: to declare a victory after a partial or
compromised accomplishment, or even after a total defeat. The buses
will be free, or they won’t be; the pre-K program will be extended
to two-year-olds, or it won’t be; the rents will be frozen, or they
will go up again.

No small number of city hall watchers, both outside of Mamdani’s
party and within it, will be rooting for him to fail. As an example of
the potential of leftwing and democratic socialists to govern and
deliver on their promises, it will be crucial that he succeed.
Meanwhile, as the midterms
[[link removed]]
approach, the example of Mamdani – who will not be standing for
election this coming November – will be cast as a reflection on
every single Democrat who is.

Candidates will petition for his endorsement or throw him under the
bus, depending on their own needs in the moment – a few of them
might do both over the coming year. He will be made a symbol of the
Democratic party. Voters will be looking to see what kind of example
he sets.

It is part of the fraught history of this country that there have
always been these competing impulses in American politics: between
collectivism and extraction, solidarity and domination, egalitarianism
and hierarchy, optimism and cruelty. Rarely has the choice been so
stark between the standard bearers of the two parties. Often, they
have looked more alike than this. At the outset of 2026, they look
quite different.

*
_Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist_

* Zohran Mamdani
[[link removed]]
* progressive change
[[link removed]]
* Donald Trump
[[link removed]]
* imperialism
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Bluesky [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]