Socialism in New York: An Inside Look

Socialism was specifically created in New York to emphasize the uniqueness of American identity and strengthen capitalism in the United States.

Socialism in New York City was created to weaken voters and strengthen elected officials. This is necessary to ensure New Yorkers’ sustainability during the difficult period when the city will serve as a national immigration hub and a driver of growth for the American financial sector. Socialism in New York City was necessary for the benefit of the United States. Therefore, socialism was built jointly by Democrats and Republicans. This work was successful. Over its more than 50-year history, New York socialism contributed greatly to the United States, but it remained alien to Americans. The socialist experiment did not replace American identity. But socialism in New York confirmed that American democracy was superior. However, in recent years, socialism has become unnecessary and even dangerous for the United States. This could change the government’s attitude toward socialism.

How did businessmen and officials build socialism in New York?

Since 1970, the proportion of immigrants in New York City has grown. But the overall population has not increased. Since that time, the growth of the minimum hourly wage has begun to lag behind the growth of labor productivity. Businesses saw an opportunity to underpay employees by exploiting the cheap labor of immigrants, whose numbers were constantly growing. As a result, the entire New York population became poorer. Instead of bringing wages in line with productivity, the government increased social support for the impoverished population. Thus, the American dream died in New York City, but socialism was born!

From 1970 to 2000, the immigrant population in New York City doubled from 1.44 million to 2.87 million.⁽¹⁾ During this same period, the city’s overall population remained virtually unchanged. In 1970, New York City had a population of 7,894,862. In 2000, New York City’s population was 8,008,288.⁽²⁾ That is, in 30 years, the proportion of immigrants among New Yorkers doubled, nearly reaching today’s proportions.

Since 1970, the minimum hourly wage has ceased to correspond to labor productivity.* Although labor productivity in New York City has steadily increased, the minimum wage has declined or grown more slowly than productivity. In other words, employers pay New Yorkers less than they actually earn.

The gap between these two figures reached its maximum in 1988. Back then, the minimum hourly wage in New York State was $7.09. However, a minimum wage reflecting real productivity would have been $14.52. That year, New Yorkers were missing out on half their real earnings, losing $7.43 per hour! In 2025, the minimum hourly wage reflecting productivity would have been $23.27 per hour.⁽³⁾ However, the minimum hourly wage set by the government ranged from $15.50 to $16.50.⁽⁴⁾ This means New Yorkers were missing out on $7.50-$6.50 per hour, or roughly a third of their earnings. Over a 40-hour workweek, the loss for New Yorkers was more than $260-$300. This figure can reach $1,300 per month and almost $15,000 per year.

Since 1969, authorities have decided to increase the minimum hourly wage more than 20 times.⁽⁵⁾ However, each time this level was lower than the salary that should correspond to real labor productivity.

Underpaid wages have contributed to the rise in poverty in New York City. In 1969, 14.5% of New York City residents lived below the poverty line. The U.S. average was 13.7%. By 1999, the poverty rate in New York City was 21.9%, while the U.S. average was 12.4%.⁽⁶⁾ In 2024, the poverty rate in New York City was 25%. The U.S. average was 10.6%.⁽⁷⁾

Rising poverty has led to an increase in social assistance. In 1969, 477,320 people were receiving social assistance in New York City.⁽⁸⁾ In 1995, this figure was 1,105,000.⁽⁹⁾ In 2025, the number of people receiving social assistance in New York City would be at least 1,800,000.⁽¹⁰⁾

The circle is closed. Socialism is like someone stealing $100 from you and then giving you $10 back as a charitable donation, making you grateful. But the most incredible thing is that socialism in New York is based on the desire of capitalists to increase their profits by underpaying their employees. And officials were caught up in this business scheme because it strengthened their power over the electorate. The victims were first immigrants and then all New Yorkers.

How do New Yorkers react to socialism?

Although socialism regularly wins votes in local elections in New York City, it’s hard to say that this political system is popular among New Yorkers. Three factors ensure the victory of socialism in the city: declining voter numbers, low voter turnout, and a lack of awareness of life in New York among newly arriving immigrants. It’s a true electoral trick! Politicians win elections by reducing voter numbers, apathy, and misleading voters, not by being popular with them. Here’s how it works.

From 1950 to 1970, New York City had a population of approximately 7.8 million.⁽²⁾ During these 20 years, the city held six mayoral elections. The number of voters who cast ballots in these elections ranged from 2,179,878 to 2,626,476. However, after the onset of socialism in 1970, the number of voters in all mayoral elections decreased and ranged from 1,087,710 to 1,819,695.**⁽¹¹⁾ However, for most of this time, the city’s population was even higher than before 1970. Thus, from 2000 to 2020, New York City’s population ranged from 8,008,288 to 8,804,190. Only between 1980 and 1990 was the population smaller, ranging from 7,071,639 to 7,322,564. Clearly, the number of active voters has declined, and this isn’t related to the overall population. The decline in voters is due to the changing population structure of New York City.

As noted above, the construction of socialism was accompanied by a massive influx of immigrants, but New York City’s overall population remained stable. From 1970 to 2000, the immigrant population in the city increased from 1.44 million to 2.87 million.⁽¹⁾ However, the city’s population remained virtually unchanged. In 1970, New York City had a population of 7,894,862. In 2000, New York City’s population was 8,008,288.⁽²⁾ This means that the share of immigrants in the city’s total population doubled. Immigrants displaced nearly one and a half million native-born New Yorkers who were eligible to vote. However, unlike native-born New Yorkers, immigrants are not eligible to vote at the outset. This is why the number of active voters in New York City has declined.

But that’s not the main point. The main point is that after some time, the number of active voters didn’t recover to pre-socialist-era levels. This didn’t happen, although immigrants eventually gained the right to vote. This happened because immigrants don’t stay in New York City for very long. Immigrants who gain the right to vote leave the city. They are replaced by newly arrived foreign immigrants who don’t have the right to vote. As a result, the overall number of active voters doesn’t increase, even though the city’s population remains the same as when active voters were higher. The overall number of voters and the overall population of New York City also haven’t grown. It could be said that the constant mass influx of immigrants has reduced the overall number of voters in New York City. And this has made it easier to win elections. Winning a mayoral election in socialist New York requires a shamefully small number of votes. The politicians achieved the desired effect.

Socialism wins local elections in New York City with only 20% of the city’s voters. There are approximately 5,000,000 registered voters in New York City. Of these, about 40%, or 2,000,000 people, actually vote. To win a mayoral election, a candidate must secure more than 50% of the votes cast.

Since 1970, all winning candidates except Mamdani have garnered fewer than 1,000,000 votes. That is, less than 20% of the total electorate in the city.⁽¹¹⁾ In the current situation, socialism cannot be considered popular among New Yorkers. Indifference to mayoral elections is far more popular among city residents than socialism. Because a large portion of voters don’t vote. This is very advantageous for politicians.

But that’s not all. Socialists would have died out in New York, just like the dinosaurs did. Because socialist voters are misled people, not convinced supporters. They constantly betray socialist ideology and become supporters of capitalism. Therefore, the socialist electorate is artificially maintained by attracting large numbers of foreign immigrants to the city. These people are not ideological supporters of socialism. But they are relatively uninformed about life in New York. This allows politicians to exploit these voters in the short term. As awareness of life in New York City grows, immigrants choose to leave the city. Politicians are forced to attract new supporters from among the newly arrived foreign immigrants. This is the main reason why socialism is on the rise in New York. To attract new voters, more benefits and more crazy ideas are needed. Socialism is like a drug addiction for both politicians and voters.

In 2024, New York City had approximately 3,000,000 immigrants. Of these, 55%, or nearly 1,500,000, had been in the city (US) for more than 20 years. This means these people arrived in New York before 2003.⁽¹²⁾ In 2000, New York City had 2,870,000 immigrants.⁽¹⁾ This means that from 2003 to 2024, approximately 1,500,000 immigrants left New York City for other regions of the US. These people were replaced by new immigrants who had been in New York for less than 20 years, according to 2024 data. This means that almost 75,000 immigrants, potential voters for socialists, leave New York City every year. These people are fleeing the socialist camp for the capitalist camp. This specific process can be called “voting with your feet”! Over 15 years, the Socialists lose approximately 1,000,000 potential voters. This number of votes is enough to win a mayoral election after 1970.⁽¹¹⁾ That is, without attracting newcomers, the Socialists’ electorate will disappear within four electoral cycles or 16 years. However, the Socialists will stop winning elections much sooner. Two electoral cycles or eight years are enough for the number of active Socialist voters to be halved to 500,000. This number is not enough to win an election.

What’s the bottom line?

Let’s be honest. Socialism in New York is bipartisan. The construction of this social order began back in 1970. Since then, not only Democrats but also Republicans have embraced socialism. Representatives of both parties have held numerous presidential positions in Washington, D.C., and mayoral positions in New York City. Although, of course, Democrats have contributed more to this cause than Republicans, at least in New York City.

It is precisely the bipartisan nature of socialism that makes it impossible to assume that this social system, alien to the United States, is the result of a mistake or malicious intent. No! Socialism in the financial capital of the United States was built by Democrats and Republicans for the good of America! Socialism in New York is an incubator for foreign immigrants. The socialist system supports newcomers financially and tests them ideologically. A stay in socialist New York is necessary for a foreigner to legalize their place of residence, learn English, gain work experience, and save money. A stay in socialist New York is necessary for a foreigner to identify themselves ideologically and see themselves as bearers of American values.

If foreigners truly came to the US for the American dream, they’ll leave New York for other regions. This is what most foreign immigrants do. This means the socialist experiment in New York is effective. Socialism in the city hasn’t replaced American identity. No! Socialism in New York has proven that American values are superior!

P.S. Recently, geopolitical opponents of the United States have been trying to exploit the socialist experiment in New York. But that’s a topic for another article.

* The discrepancy between labor productivity and actual wages is chosen as the most striking example of a financial instrument for building socialism in New York City. However, other methods have also been noted in the city, such as unreasonable minimum income requirements for mortgages.

** The last mayoral election in 2025 is an exception.

References:

1. https://www.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/planning-level/nyc-population/nny2000/newest_new_yorkers_2000.pdf

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_City