The rhetoric between Democratic candidate Zohran Mamdani and his political opponents in the New York City mayoral election has recently escalated. Mamdani recently gave a speech to Muslim leaders outside a mosque in the Bronx, in which she shared that after 9/11, her aunt stopped riding the subway wearing a hijab because she felt a lack of safety.

Mamdani said this experience is common for many Muslims in New York and that he was advised to hide his religious identity if he entered politics. He stressed that every Muslim’s dream is to be given respect and equal status like any other New Yorker. After this statement, US Vice President J.D. Vance sarcastically said that, “According to Mamdani, the real victim of 9/11 was his aunt, who was just seen as bad by some people.” This statement became a topic of discussion in social media and media.

Opposition’s attack and allegations

Mamdani’s opponents are three main leaders: Curtis Sliwa (Republican), Andrew Cuomo (Independent) and Eric Adams (Democrat), who have abstained from the election this time. These leaders have accused Mamdani of having radical views, while the Democratic Party says that this is taking the form of Islamophobic rhetoric. Cuomo is accused of laughing at Mamdani’s insensitive comments on 9/11 in a radio show, although he later denied it. Mayor Adams said that New York should not be like Europe and asked to be cautious of Islamic extremism. Sliva described Mamdani as a supporter of “global jihad”.

Mamdani’s answer

Mamdani said that now they will not be afraid of their Muslim identity and will not make any changes in their religion, food or customs. He clarified that during his initial days in politics, he hid his identity so that people would not judge him only on the basis of his religion, but now he has decided to show himself in the light and fight openly for equal rights. He said, “I will not change my identity, nor my food, nor my beliefs. But I will no longer see myself in the shadow, I will find myself in the light.”

After this statement, the debate regarding the issue of Muslim identity and religious equality in the New York City Mayor elections has intensified. This issue could prove to be decisive for voters in this election contest as it highlights sensitive aspects of the city’s social and cultural diversity.

Read this also-

Bihar Assembly election 2025: BJP vs RJD clash in Danapur assembly constituency! Know who is that powerful person around whom politics is revolving

The year of 1947, the year of independence, brought a turn in the history of India forever, which changed the life of crores of people. The country got independence, but together had to pay a very heavy price for partition. After independence, India and Pakistan emerged as two separate countries. A name was the most discussed behind this partition, which was of Mohammad Ali Jinnah. Jinnah is called the founder of Pakistan. He demanded a separate country on the basis of religion and also achieved it. You will be surprised to know that the person who divided India into two pieces in the name of religion was himself against casteism and religious discrimination. Let us know how Jinnah, who divided India in the name of religion, was against casteism?

The story of Jinnah’s family and conversion

Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s ancestor was a Hindu. His family was from Kathiawar area of Gujarat. Jinnah’s grandfather’s name was Premjibhai Meghji Thakkar, who was a Lohana caste businessman. Premji Bhai’s business was connected to fish, but the non -vegetarian was completely forbidden in his caste. Because of this, he had to face protest in the society. Due to which he changed his religion and became Muslims. Jinnah’s family also moved forward on the same path. In this way, Jinnah’s family went towards conversion due to a social boycott and ethnic narrowness. This story tells that somewhere an disagreement against casteism was in Jinnah’s blood.

How was Jinnah against casteism?

Jinnah had given such a statement, which is still in the discussion. He had said that you are free, to go to your temples, to go to your mosques, or to go to some other place of worship. The state will have nothing to do with religion. Over time, the difference between Hindus and Muslims will disappear. Neither Hindu nor Hindu will remain, nor Muslims. Muslims at least from political point of view. Like Muslims also have many castes, Pathan, Punjabi, Shia, Sunni. In the same way, Brahmins, Khatri, Bengali, Madrasi among Hindus. If this discrimination was not done, India would have become independent long ago. In the coming time, people will be Indian first, then Hindus or Muslims. That too not religious, but as a political identity,

Listening to this speech shows that he was against casteism. According to historians, this speech was part of Jinnah’s policy. Its purpose was to convince the Government of India that Pakistan would treat its minorities well, so India should also allow its 3.5 crore Muslims to live in India instead of sending it to Pakistan. This speech is also considered a political move. Its real purpose was to protect Pakistan from the huge population migration that could weaken it.

Also read: Nehru or Jinnah, who was more rich? Know who had how much money