Billionaires' Railroad to Ruin

This is The Zero Hour with Richard R.J. Eskow, produced by the WEAC Radio Network and broadcasting from the banks of the Anacostia directly into the halls of power. And now your host, Richard R.J. Eskow. Hello, everybody, and welcome back to the program. Once in a while, I see a story in the newspaper that or some other mainstream medium that just illustrates. concisely the assumptions on which our entire discourse is based. It doesn't have to be the biggest story of the year. It doesn't have to be the biggest story of the week. It just kind of illustrates something. Case in point got me thinking this week. Headline in the New York Times, why can't New York fix? Penn Station. That's the headline. And I agree with every criticism of Penn Station that any politician or any observer of any kind wants to make about it. It is truly a combination of a Dante-esque hell. and the innards of a beehive from a fiery underground, so where it is a god-awful place to find yourself, particularly in the middle of the trip. But the subheading to New York Times, why can't New York fix Penn Station? The nation's busiest transit hub, says the subheadline, stands as a symbol of a condition that afflicts so many attempts to get big things done in America. Innersia. Then it goes on to talk about many of the real problems about Penn Station, the fact that it is now owned by Amtrak, whereas New York City has other property rights in the area, the fact that each of the several railroads that serves it has their own call upon it, the fact that it serves the tri-state area. All of these are, of course, factors. But one thing that gets almost entirely overlooked in the piece is the role of billionaire self-interest in the quagmire that is Penn Station. They do mention, for example, that the in the... They compare some of our infrastructure improvements with the quick ones done in places like Saudi Arabia, which built an entire transit system in Riyadh in little over 10 years. They say in the United States, the investment of billions of dollars in taxpayer money and the extraordinary undertaking of renovating central infrastructure are among the many reasons.

But the failure often stops and starts with politics. They say very little about the guy who's been standing in the way of a lot of improvement to Penn Station. And that is a billionaire named James. L. Dolan, whose company owns Madison Square Garden, built largely with public funds, which sits on top of Penn Station and all the struts holding up a Madison Square Garden, which is making billionaire James Dolan even richer. And he's a very obnoxious person, by the way. All those struts make it very, very difficult and expensive to try to renovate Penn Station. What would be a clean fix? I have two words for the people in charge of this project. Eminent domain. Declare eminent domain. Dolan says he doesn't want to move. Well, tough. That's what Eminent Domain is for. He doesn't get a right to inconvenience the people of the city, the region, and the entire country. Knock down Madison Square Garden, rebuild the thing the way it needs to be rebuilt. And as with Eminent Domain, give Dolan a fair market price for the real estate, but not the kind of quick killing that he wants. let the people build the station they need and do not let this billionaire stand in the way. So to restate the New York Times' assumption, I'm going to say it stands as a symbol of a condition that affects so many things, attempts to get big things done in America. Capitalism. We'll be right back.

But in as much as it can illustrate a way forward for other candidates seeking office who want, who are coming from the left, who want to take power, who want to change our country for the better, right? The whole point of a left strategy to build power needs to involve. taking elected office alongside outside pressure. And so what Zohran Mamdani did that was so, so effective, was that he leaned into his identity instead of shying away from it. This is something Democrats have been accused of doing too much of, and instead of listening to all of the naysayers, he went full force. Someone pointed out on social media, and I thought this was so clever, all of the things that the right accused. wrongly accused or claimed Barack Obama was, Zohran Mamdani was in actuality. He was and he is a Muslim, right? And instead of trying to doubt play that, he leaned into it, down to the font and the colors of his campaign literature, which are basically based on Bollywood. movie signs. If you travel anywhere in India, you see these colorful, most of them hearken from the 80s and 90s, colorful billboards hand-painted by artists that have these sensationalist like pop art style fonts. His campaign picked that to lean into his identity. But then he reached out across identity. The The campaign ads that he recorded in other languages were genius, Spanish, Hindi slash Urdu, Arabic. I mean, it was quite remarkable. That, all of that aside, there's so much more. I mean, just give me a few more minutes. In the last week of his campaign, he went club hopping. He showed his millennial card. He went club hopping. He went from one club to the other. He knew the words of the songs that young voters were dancing to. He was up with the DJs dancing with them. And then on the very last victory speech that he finally gave, he started out quoting Eugene Debs, right? Right, I caught that. Absolutely. Then he sent a message to Donald Trump saying, I have four words for you because I know you're listening. Turn the volume up. This was a direct quote of rapper KRS1's signature song, Turn the Volume Up, that essentially has something to the effect of the lyrics or something to the effect of like, we're going to get rid of the monsters or I can't remember the exact line now, but you can look it up, turn the volume up. And then he wrapped up his speech to the soundtrack from a film. This might have been missed by non-South Asians, but there is a very famous movie that is called Dhoom.

and that millennial Indians know really well. And the signature song of that movie is Dthum Machale, which was the name, which was the beats that if you watch the very end of his victory speech, there was a song that played out. And it roughly translates into make some noise. And the film is about the rich stealing from the poor, sorry, the poor stealing from the rich, like a Robin Hood. Okay. So a Robin Hood type theme. So that's all the identity stuff, which immediately allowed people to connect with him. He was so authentic. And then he had a very strong messaging discipline on bread and butter economic justice issues. He didn't speak just in vague platitudes like Obama did, because a lot of people are comparing him to Obama. They're thinking, the last time I felt this way was when Obama was elected or came out on the scene. He didn't just focus on vague platitudes about hope and change. He was really, really concrete and specific. Universal child care, this is how we're going to pay for it. Fast and free buses, this is how we're going to pay for it. Grocery stores, municipal run grocery stores, this is what, down to what it will and won't sell. So specific that it, and pitch perfect to people's needs and then never went off message, hammered it over and over again to the point where people looking at him immediately knew that. this is what they were going to get when he got elected. So this was such an important strategy to send it to the country. I am a brown man. I represent everything you think you hate. And I'm going to deliver all the things that we all need. I am not leaving. Get used to me. I'm here. Don't scapegoat immigrants. We are part of this community. And we together are going to work for all of us to benefit all of us. for all of the things that we actually need. And by like European social democracy standards, his asks are not even that radical. It is, it was a brilliant, brilliant campaign and other left candidates need to study how they can do something similar. Yeah, and I would say in terms of narrative, Sonali, thank you for that because that's really helpful. There are, you know, two things I would add. not add as in they're missing, but as in they complement what you said, I think. One would be the word unapologetic or a word along those lines that certainly Democrats, especially progressive Democrats as a group, have tended to feel sort of apologetic and tentative about... We're sorry, but we'd really like to give you health care, kind of. But whether it came to his own identity as a Muslim, as a brown man, as a millennial, as a young person, or I guess post-man, I don't know what he is, generation-wise, as a young person, or his policies, the vibe throughout was, I am what I am. Here it is, but it's fun. You know, he also, I remember when I was- Always joyful. Joyful. I remember when I was a rock and roll musician, the manager said to me, the successful groups are the ones that create a world you want to live in. And whether it was a Beatles, whether it was Bowie, whether it was, you know, whomever, it's like, yeah, I'd like to be, it's still true today of, you know, whomever, Lady Gaga, Taylor Swift.

about their dedicated fans. And he had that energy of, no, but this world that I'm describing is a world you're going to love, you know. And so that's one. And the other thing that I've talked about in a couple other places, including as a guest rather than a host, I wrote before the election. about the fact that as I put it, oh, my, I'm blurring here a little bit for some reason. Excuse me, I'll try to retain my focus. Sorry, I shouldn't get compulsive about that, but give me just a second and we'll see if we can fix that. It's Trump. He's coming after me, right? The other thing is that I did a piece right before Zohran Mamdani's... election called something like Zohran Mamdani's program is surprisingly affordable. You know, with a subbed, I wish all revolutions came this cheap. And what I meant by that was, first of all, I ran the numbers, aside from universal child care, which costs a lot, but could easily be raised with modest shifts. Everything else is a rounding error in the New York City budget. First of all, free buses. 600 million in lost revenue, which is what about less than 1% of the New York City budget, one-tenth of that for the grocery store experiment, which would become self-sustaining if it works, nothing for the rent freeze, plus it would free up more money into the New York City economy and would boost everything. So. And also that most of what he's proposed has been tried somewhere else. You came on the show and wrote and reported about New Mexico's for universal child care program. Bloomberg. Michael Bloomberg proposed a limited free bus program. We have a free bus program where I live. Michelle Wu and Boston is already piloting one. Sure. And what was different is not the individual pieces. You know, the Democratic Party usually presents you with a laundry list. What was different was the overarching narrative of a... In his words, democratic socialism. Yes, not that we'll try to get this for you, but you deserve this. You work hard. You deserve this. And I thought that was a narrative act as well. Yes, I think that was so critical. Also, he himself lives in a rent control department in the city. So when, yes, his mother is a famous filmmaker and his father's an academic.

But his own assets and values, I mean, it's been looked up. He's basically a New Yorker. He is a very average New Yorker, right? Doesn't fall in the very low end of working class New Yorkers, nor on the very high end. And he was able to really capture the spirit and the energy. And you're right. I think that's so important to say, this is what New Yorkers deserve because every politician comes along thinking, well, what can we do not to alienate the rich residents in our city? And no one thinks about. all of the displacement of ordinary people who are barely making it out of the city because somehow they're never seen as valuable enough. And so, yeah, he really uplifted and valued ordinary New Yorkers. And I think that combination of joyful, because it's easy for the left to be a little strident when it comes to when we talk about our issues. And for a lot of folks, it's easy to show that anger. And Zohran Mamdani genuinely looked like he was joyful, having a good time. Someone called him when he was demonstrating a city, a bicycle, rental bicycle, some right winger yelled at him, communist across the street. And he turned back and said, I think it's pronounced sighted. Right. Like so joyful, able to pivot without being hateful. And that plus. uncompromising on his position. So literally his victory speech, often victory speeches are a little, like especially the centrist Democrats. Victory speeches are more appeasing. We're all going to work together. Of course, I'm going to reach across the aisle. He was like, this is how we're going to enact the agenda. And the second day, the day after he was elected, he unveiled his five women transition team. the most central figure of whom is Lena Khan Paul. I saw that, yeah. Yeah, the chair of the Federal Trade Commissioner under Biden, which was one of the few things that Biden did really well, was appoint her. And she had gone after corporate monopolies and enforcing anti-trust laws. So with his team, he made it very clear that he was ready, willing, and able to enact the ambitious agenda that he promised. So for me, there's the pre-election model of how you run a perfect, incredible, pitch, perfect campaign. And now the post-election, even though just a week has passed, there are some extremely promising signs of what the left can do to ensure that they are not breaking promises. Because the worst thing that can happen is for Zohran Mamdani to be the poster child for left disappointment, right? Or for the general public's disappointment in a leftist agenda. We'll be right back after this with more of my conversation with Sonali Cole Hotcar. I am Richard R.J. Eskow, and you're listening to The Zero Hour. You are listening to the Weact Radio Network produced in Washington, D.C. Visit us online at weactradio.com or at YouTube.com slash WeactRadio, D.C.

And we are back on The Zero Hour. I'm your host, Richard R.J. Eskow, we now continue our conversation with our very own senior correspondent Sonali Cole Hotcar. First of all, he's going to be subjected to, well, he's already been under enormous pressure. The fact that he's been able to handle it so well is impressive to me. But. the pressure he's going to have in governing New York and the crises he's going to face, what the left, we on the left sometimes fail to recognize is that if we're not there as a countervailing, force, then we're setting ourselves up for disappointment, no matter who it is. First of all, anybody, including Zohran Mamdani, is only human, is they're going to have their weak spot. Number two is that they're going to be under tremendous pressure to, so he says, keep on, you know, the billionaire he says, Jessica Tisch as New York City Police Commission. I'm okay with a certain level of compromise, but. It says to me that we can't do the kind of elect a hero and then sit back and wait for them to show the world how great we are kind of tactic. Exactly. I agree because it's very, very easy to fall in love with a person and to put your hopes and dreams in that person. People have done it with Obama. They did it with Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris even before they were elected by senior. you and I have talked about this before, that idea of I'm with her, which is just such a wrong dynamic because a public servant works for the people. And I think Zohran Mamdani's already made it very clear that that is his goal as well, that he wants to, you know, he wants, he's leaned into his identity, but not in the sense in the way in which people, he wants people to put him on a pedestal, right? So what's really, really promising is that there is already outside. organizing taking place because he was able to mobilize 100,000 volunteers for his campaign that were going door-to-door canvassing for him. And now what do those 100,000 people do? Because the biggest worry and the biggest flaw we've seen in elections is that people get excited for elections and then go to sleep or whatever, resume their life thinking, all right, I'll just vote for something the next time the election comes around and they don't pay attention. So there's already a new formation called Our Time for an affordable NYC. And I encourage audiences to go and check it out. It's Our Time, OU-R-E-I-M-E dot NYC. And it uses the... very signature colors and sort of fonts of the Zohran Mamdani campaign to indicate that the idea is that these are people who are involved in his campaign. They are calling themselves an independent organization who is going to build on this community of volunteers from the Zohran Mamdani campaign saying that this is going to be a vehicle for continued engagement, a way for folks to plug in and stay active while they find a long-term political home.

And it's basically an offshoot of this campaign that is attempting to ensure that his agenda is actually enacted. So it's not an official part of the campaign. And they're saying they're fully independent. They're not directed by any elected official. This is really powerful and really important. Another model for us to adopt. So anytime there's an inspiring leftist candidate that's enacting the people's agenda, because that's basically what he was doing, enacting the people's agenda. there needs to be a follow-up after they're elected, because that's just step one of the victory. Step two is ensuring that they actually deliver. Because so many times we've seen that step two not happen. I mean, here in L.A., we have Mayor Karen Bass. People got excited. She's in place now, but there isn't enough organizing to hold her accountable as there was to help get her elected. So this was really important, I think. And we saw, I mean, to me, the great example I always go back to is a 19th century populist movement in the United States, which did a couple things. It created lasting organizations where people could do things in their communities and become part of a community, a communal enterprise that gave their lives meaning. And number two, it became, in modern terms, what we'd call a space. where people could model the values that they wanted to bring to the society as whole. For example, populist Granges and other organizations were among the first in this country to have women executives, women leaders. to integrate and so on you had the united mine workers too and the union movement be one of the first integrated movements in this country so if these uh if not only in new york city but elsewhere we can start to build maybe on the model of something like our time new york city uh something that gives people an ongoing purpose so much the better because that's how a political campaign becomes a social movement I agree. And I think that this is a thing that needs to happen in cities around the country, especially cities are odd beds of such organizing in large part because they are so vibrant, diverse centers of culture that everybody loves to visit and then everybody also loves to trash and trash talk. And a large part of what makes cities great is immigrant cultures. And I'm looking at Seattle. I'm looking at Boston, right? I mentioned Boston, Michelle Wu. She ran out opposed. She has, you know, she's divested from climate, divested city funds from the climate, from fossil fuel companies. And then in Seattle, a democratic socialist. Well, yeah, Democratic Socialist named Katie Wilson has run for office. They're still counting votes. And it's possible that Seattle may have a socialist mayor too. So we'll see. I'm not sure where the position is right now. All of these cities need that accountability after the fact. And I think we've seen this evolution.

because cities have had so-called liberal mayors in the past. Like I'm thinking about London Breed in Oakland. I'm thinking about, you know, even for that matter, de Blasio in New York, right? Blasio, I was going to say, yeah, yeah. Who have gotten the first part of the equation right and then gotten the second part of it wrong. And I'm also thinking about the Tea Party movement in the right. There was a moment on the right where an extremist, of course, billionaire funded. AstroTurf movement realized that they could play on people's anxieties, have message discipline. be very extremist and radical and rally enough voters to shift their party so far to the right that now the entire party has gone there. And I think, I mean, I don't want to be too much of a, you know, obviously a left agenda is exactly the opposite in terms of not being billionaire funded and actually wanting to govern in people's interest. However, I think people on the left have come to a realization as to how. they can win power and the messaging that needs to happen because what was missing was a cultural component. Democrats had platforms that were very much speaking to progressive values and ideals. But they didn't know how to talk about them. And they, because they didn't really want to talk about them because they really work outtowing to the Wall Streeters. And so the progressives in the party or progressives from outside have come into the party to push it, you know, groups like justice, Democrats or whatever have really found a cultural moment to make. it mainstream to demand affordability and what is going to get affordability, not giving more money and tax breaks to the rich, which is the rights solution, but actually fusing money directly from our taxes into our needs. So it's a really powerful moment. Which forces me, before we go, I'm sorry, to bring up one of my soap boxes, which is that the sort of progressive, what are they, the PMC, the professional managerial class Democrats, not only politicians, but many voters contemptuous of Trump voters. And one of the first things, you know, we've talked about this before that Zohran Mamdani did as a long-shot candidate was go to place like Staten Island in Queens, full of Trump voters and asked them, why'd you vote for the guy? that willingness to talk, to listen, to hear, I think that's part of why he has this laser to focus on affordability, because that's the one thing that brings all Americans together. We can't make ends meet. This is impossible. We're scrambling just to stay in one place. Okay, that's your new coalition. If you can divorce yourself from the billionaires or distance yourself from the billionaires enough to actually do it, you know the way. Now, let's do it.

Exactly. I think that that's really, really important. And, you know, again, some centrist Democrats have thought that the way to that place was to do it through a candidate who was palatable to Trump voters, i.e. a straight white male candidate. You know, think like John Fetterman style people. And of course, when they have the chance, like Bernie Sanders, they chose not to. But after that, they've gone after younger versions. Right. of that and Zohran Mamdani showed that that's irrelevant and in fact It's actually better to, because the Trump goes after immigrants as a way to scapegoat as a way to distract from billionaires. It was, it's actually, it actually, I think, has worked better to have it. That message come from someone like Zohran Mamdani. But I think you're right that because he, he reached out to Trump voters. The huge shift that we saw, demographically speaking, for mayoral races was young. male voters. Zohran Mamdani, I think there was a 40% increase. I shouldn't say that because I can't remember what it was relative to, whether it was relative to the previous mayor or his own. Anyway, there was a big jump in the number of young male voters. You know, the same demographic that in the 2024 election, people were all worried was tilting right because young men went. hard for Trump across race. And in New York City, young men went hard for Zohran Mamdani, which is really awesome. So let's see what happens. Yeah, that's what I think being real will do for you as much as anything. But there's so much more we could say. But as always, Sonali called Hotcar, senior correspondent here. And of course, so much more at Rising Up with Sonali.com. It's always thanks for your great observations. And as always, thanks for coming on the program. Thanks, Richard. I'll see you next week. I look forward to it. And we'll be right back after this. I'm Richard R.J. Eskow, and this is The Zero Hour. This is The Zero Hour with Richard, RJ Ascal. Check out our free video archives at YouTube.com slash The Zero Hour.

And we are back on the zero hour. I, as always, in your host, Richard R.J. Eskow. I've had fun this week, not only on our show last week, but in the conversation with Sonali Kohotkar on the Brad Friedman program and elsewhere, I've had fun talking about my work into how surprisingly affordable. So Zohran Mamdani's. proposals are. But I'd also like to take a minute, first of all, to talk about how surprisingly or not popular they are. They would be surprising to a lot of people who think they run this country and do run this country, but they're surprisingly affordable, surprisingly popular. And I have to say, even with my low opinion of the billionaires who run this country, they've been surprisingly inept and sloppy and trying to deny both reality. So let me give you a sense of what I mean. First of all, in terms of his policies, I speak of the policies of someone like Zohran Mamdani or the mayor or elect of Seattle. Katie Wilson, who has some similar proposals, UGov, which is a reputable survey firm, polled policies like those of Mondanis, not only for New York City, but nationwide to see what the country at large thinks of them, because, of course, everybody's saying, oh, everybody. in the mainstream, in the elite circles, are saying, oh, Democrats will destroy themselves if they adopt Zohran Mamdani's policies will behold and look upon the face of destruction. 69% of respondents somewhat or strongly support raising taxes on corporations and millionaires, just as Zohran Mamdani proposes to do. 66% support implementing free child care for every child aged six weeks to five years. 65% support freezing rent for lower income tenants. So far, every single one of these proposals I've mentioned has support of at least two thirds of voters. Now we're getting to the mere... strong majority territory. 57% support raising the minimum wage to $30 by 2030. and 53% more than half support permanently eliminating the fares on public buses. That's pretty popular agenda. Now, data for progress, who's been on the program a few times, they also surveyed likely voters, also do very good work from across the United States about key pieces of the Zohran Mamdani program. This was before he won. They're probably more powerful now, but here's what they found.

They found that speeding up the approval process to build affordable housing, 83% support, penalizing landlords who significantly increased rent or violate tenant protections, 82%. Cutting fines and fees for small businesses, which Zohran Mamdani says it was 70%, adding a 2% on tax. really a marginal tax on income over $1 million. That is 72% support at three quarters of the electorate, raising corporate taxes, same 72%, creating new violence, de-escalation programs and mental health teams in response to certain 9-11 calls instead of calling the police. 72%, at least spending some money to provide free child care for every child from infancy in their polling case through age 35%, or essentially two-thirds of voters. So these policies are really, really popular. Now, how do our... our billionaire controllers of the public discourse respond. Well, I'm writing a more complete analysis that'll be up at zero hour report.com. I hope soon. But let's start with this. Let's start about our friends at Fox News, our perhaps longest standing open tool of the billionaire class. We'll get to watch them to post and others as we have time. And again, with Larry Ellison's family buying up other media outlets, the thing is just going on and on. So let's go to how this is being covered. Let's say on Fox, Fox News. How's it covering? Well, there's my old pal. And by that, I mean, guy I had a lonesome conversation with Sean Hannity. who is, as usual, shrieking and pulling his hair out, he says there are now two groups of Democrats, the first a cob. Ball of socialists who are willing to fight tooth and nail to destroy everything that makes America great. You know, like no child care and food you can't afford and replace it with what? A Zohran Mamdani Soviet-style Marxism. The second consists of cowardly liberal Democrats, more traditional maybe that are just bending the knee, scared to death to ever challenge these radicals and put up a fight. Well, ask the people. who wanted Chuck Schumer and other Democrats to endorse Zohran Mamdani. They're now being bullied into oblivion, says Sean. They will be extinct in no time by members of their own party. He then goes on to say this, which was really hilarious to me, and I'll explain why. Sean Hannity says it will get so much worse if these socialists are able to gain

a serious foothold in our federal government. The only thing was, is, rather, it was almost 20 years ago that Sean Hannity said that socialists are gaining a serious foothold in our federal government. Right before the 2008 election, for example, he declared of then presidential candidate Barack Obama that quote, he has doubled down on socialism for America. In year one of Obama's presidency, like 2009 or early 2010, he said of, Sean Hannity said of Obama, quote, I want him to be a one-term president because he's doing so much damage with his failed socialist. policies, end quote. Now, Sean Hannity says, it will get so much worse if these socialists are able to gain a serious foothold. Well, what's up, Sean? Are you lying now? Were you lying then? Or is the answer, what I think most of us assume it is? Both, you're just doing the work. of your billionaire bosses. And of course, that command extends. to all of Fox News, whose coverage of Zohran Mamdani's win included headlines like this one. And I quote from Fox News, socialist shockwave. So Zohran Mamdani stuns New York City voters, hands power to Democrats far left flank. Well, how could he stun the voters who voted for him? That makes no sense at all. Again, Fox News. is playing from the old playbook. Now, for example, in February of 2009, just after Obama became president, is President Obama taking us toward socialism? The question is, the article asked, is it socialism? The answer is yes, after a fashion, it's the trend of socialism. A Fox News executive even admitted that he was pushing the Obama equals socialism narrative. even though it was rather far-fetched, in his words, rather far-fetched. Media Matters reported that Fox linked Obama to socialism at least 35 times in 2008. alone. Now, of course, people like Zohran Mamdani and Bernie Sanders and Katie Wilson in Seattle are self-described democratic socialists. But if you understand how lame and inept and hysterical this fear-mongering is, you understand that their policies are popular, doable, and deserve everyone's second look. We'll be right back.