Seismic Shift

The rise of second-generation immigrant leaders like Zohran Mamdani and Sadiq Khan is attributed to several factors, including a spectrum of generational shifts within ideology and the physicality of voters.

Initially, it can be attributed to demographics and urban diversity. With the rise of technology, faster transportation, and communication channels, cities are becoming increasingly multicultural. London has 12% Muslim and 40% ethnic minority residents; NYC has 9% Muslim residents, which reflects broader trends. Hence, urban areas, especially in Western nations, are becoming more ethnically varied and thus more open to diverse leadership, and someone from the ‘outside’ seems more familiar and attuned to the ever-growing multicultural society.

In terms of campaigning styles during recent political terms, there has been a deep push for grassroots mobilization and vigorous campaigning to young voters. Zohran Mamdani dramatically boosted youth and new voter turnout: 37,000 newly registered vs 3,000 in 2021, younger voters outpaced older ones for the first time this year. Primarily, these voters are Gen Z (born between the mid-1990s and early 2010s), who are less influenced by identity politics and more driven by issues like affordability and climate.

In the case of Mamdani and Khan, there was a keen focus on authentic messaging and populist platforms since both leaders built ready-made coalitions on real-life issues. Mamdani focused on affordable housing, free transit, and rent freezes, all of which resonated with lower-income urbanites. Meanwhile, Khan emphasized public transit, environmental policies, and inclusivity—issues that speak directly to Londoners’ daily experiences.

Furthermore, voters in polarized systems that swing to extremes, in this case Democrat or Republican (US), and Liberal or Conservative (UK), are gravitating towards leaders who break traditional molds and signal change and authenticity. A familiar sense of resistance and sympathy is derived from a candidate at the end of systematic suffering. Especially now, voters resonate with candidates who identify themselves with the daily practice of engaging with the public. A certain level of empathy may still exist with people due to their ethnicity, race, religion, or culture; however, it is predominantly due to a candidate’s shared experience of being ‘left out’ from the narrative that the common citizen resonates with. The crux of political victory is the sentiment of being cheated by the oppressive corporate nature of government institutions operating in the capital economy of these ‘first world’ countries. The common man relates to the common man– there may be exceptions when candidates win through charisma, stardom, legacy, or straight-up corruption, but the skillful use of media and narrative techniques pulls citizens to integrate in a shared communal experience. Where Mamdani’s campaign created “visually native” social media content (TikTok/Instagram), engaging disillusioned voters where they are active, Khan used his compelling immigrant success story—from bus driver’s son to London Mayor—to frame a narrative of hope, unity, and inclusivity during a period of economic uncertainty and market volatility in the UK following the Brexit referendum.

Most importantly, today, the pinnacle of Mamdani's forthcoming election, and Khan's ongoing favourability primarily lies in the crux of what their voters deem as the single most important political concern within the world to be, that is, Palestine. Previously, in the decade before them, electoral candidates seemed to be right-leaning and conservative, polluted with narratives ostracising the Muslim community due to the major political moments of the early 2000s. Atrocious attacks such as 9/11, 7/7, and many others were politically and personally pinned on the Muslim community, and an entire generation had to suffer a stigma. While that happened, a new generation of voters was born with social media, with a keen awareness of "fake news" and an emphasis on unlearning the confirmation bias. These voters were the Millennials and the Generation Zs (Gen Zs), who, while undergoing this ideological shift, were witnessing the persistent butchering of Palestine on Facebook, Instagram, X (formerly Twitter), and sometimes, the news media. 

The relevance of the Palestinian war is the center point of their political remembrance; from who they watch, to what they consume, and to who they endorse, these very young, but very strong-headed voters are coming to the forefront and making up the majority. Today, they have the power to elect anyone, be it Muslim leaders in predominantly right-leaning and Western countries.

Even though Mamdani’s victory, coming as a “seismic shift” in the Democratic base, betrayed widespread dissatisfaction with centrist leadership, electing leaders from diverse backgrounds sends a powerful symbolic message, especially in areas with large South Asian or Muslim populations. It counters earlier narratives of exclusion (e.g., post‑9/11 Islamophobia). It affirms that these communities have political power and voice, while someone like Donald Trump, who is against all forms of global integration, sits as the President.

Sadiq Khan, too, was elected by the people of London while Britain was undergoing a polarizing sentiment towards inclusivity within Europe and eventually chose to withdraw from the union. Khan’s eventual succession seemed to signal that, although people were unhappy with mass integration, they would still choose to elect someone new and more relatable than someone like Ben Goldsmith, who sat at the pinnacle of English aristocracy and would not be able to comprehend in his individual human experience the cultural shift that was about to occur within the country. Hence, these elections reflect shifting cultural norms—many Western societies, despite polarization, are trending towards inclusion, fairness, and social justice, particularly in metro centers. Leaders like Khan and Mamdani exemplify that shift—successfully balancing identity with universal policy goals.

Many Western societies, despite polarization, are trending towards inclusion, fairness, and social justice, particularly in metro centers.

Therefore, it is not about “South Asian politicians suddenly being trendy” or people being “inclusive,” but rather an amalgamation of factors. It is the convergence of demographic realities in dense, diverse cities, a hunger for authentic, populist leadership responding to cost‑of‑living and climate challenges, a shift in the generation of voters, especially the inclusivity of the new youth where relatability, reliability and responsiveness trumps ethnicity and novelty; young voters want to build a new road to change because all past routes have failed them, and their trust in the system that promises to serve them has collapsed.

Representation matters, especially in communities that previously felt unseen or ignored; hence, new faces mean new ideologies, a rupture in lineage politics, and thus innovative ideas for change. Put plainly, these candidates weren’t elected just because they’re South Asians; they were elected because not only were they successful enough to employ modern campaign techniques and narratives, they were intelligent enough to rightly leverage them to speak directly to the needs, concerns, and values of their constituents.