spectator.org
What Doctor Zhivago Teaches Us About New York City’s Housing Debate
The classic film, Doctor Zhivago (1965), offers a cautionary tale about what happens when collectivism threatens and confiscates private property. In this way, it provides a revealing lens through which to view the direction of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s housing agenda — and a warning about where such policies can lead if taken to their logical conclusion.
In the movie, following the Russian Revolution, Yuri Zhivago — a doctor and poet portrayed by Omar Sharif — returns home from World War I’s Eastern Front, but his family house is quite different. The once palatial estate, symbolizing the family’s warmth and generosity aside from wealth, has fallen into disrepair. Vibrancy is dulled. Boards are exposed behind the walls. Strangers are occupying the premises. And local communist authorities — members of the Residents’ Committee — greet the young doctor with skepticism and coldness. The only sympathetic, yet pained face he meets is his betrothed, Tonya (Geraldine Chaplin).
Yuri quickly realizes the truth: the home is no longer his own. Under Soviet rule, it belongs to “the people.” Private property is no more. Confronted with this reality, he adapts to survival mode, placating to their assertions and untruths, such as the censorship of a typhus outbreak in Moscow.
After his brief interrogation, Yuri and Tonya head to their tight living quarters, yet one officer shouts, “There was living space for thirteen families in this one house.” Acknowledging the accusatory slight, the doctor cautiously responds, “Yes, this is a better arrangement, comrades. More just.” The exchange captures collectivism’s inherent envy — and its proclivity to warp and destroy not only homes, but human souls.
Cea Weaver … has openly supported seizing private property, and equated homeownership to a “weapon of white supremacy.”
This scene bears an uncomfortable resemblance to rhetoric increasingly heard in New York City politics. Cea Weaver — Mayor Mamdani’s appointed tenant advocate — has openly supported seizing private property, and equated homeownership to a “weapon of white supremacy.” Prior to her appointment as executive director of the Mayor’s Office to Protect Tenants, Weaver also advocated for electing more communists, rent control, and closing eviction courts, among other anti-private property policies. (RELATED: Mamdani’s Rent Control Plans Will Make the Rental Market Worse for Working People)
Likewise, Mamdani, a democratic socialist, has called for a citywide rent freeze and expansive public housing construction in order to address affordability concerns. To him, these are pragmatic solutions — though there are legal obstacles that could possibly obstruct the realization of this vision. Nevertheless, his vision — and Weaver by extension — ultimately treats private ownership and wealth accumulation as morally suspect, and, at worst, racist. Moreover, as the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) argues, the policies could cause “the deterioration of the regulated housing stock into a full-blown crisis.” (RELATED: From Solidarity to Statism: Mayor Mamdani’s Vision for New York City)
Still, Weaver’s appointment as housing czar should not be taken lightly. Despite the legal and constitutional challenges, she now wields a lever of power with the ability to mold New York City’s housing policy for years to come, as well as influence other Democrat-led cities.
After all, the elimination of private property undergirds her worldview and is intrinsic in the communist, socialist ethos as expressed by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in The Communist Manifesto (1848). Yet the Mamdani administration — under the guise of the “warmth of collectivism” — has failed to learn the lessons of history. As Doctor Zhivago illustrates, these radical ideas have led to societies’ ruination and, worse, the deaths of hundreds of millions. (RELATED: The ‘Warmth of Collectivism’ Comes to New York)
The consequences of this agenda would be profound. Even conservatives such as George Will, who have suggested the need for a “conspicuous, confined experiment with socialism” to “crack it up again,” underestimate the risks. Vladimir Lenin, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, and others needed only a sliver of authority to unleash their destructive authoritarianism. A communist and socialist foothold in New York — one of the world’s premier metros — may be enough to embolden other like-minded movements elsewhere. Even now, California is considering a billionaire tax: a five percent fee on all wealth assets. While not directly attributable to New York City, such proposals are undoubtedly reinforced by the Mamdani administration’s insistence on taxing the affluent to finance its policy ambitions.
Certainly, some New Yorkers recognize the gravity of these aims, with many leaving for other, less taxing states like Texas, Florida, Tennessee, and South Carolina. But a generational struggle between free-market capitalism and communism is no longer looming — but here. And it is a battle no one can necessarily escape to greener pastures.
Poll after poll, the young are increasingly embracing socialism. A December survey by The Economist/YouGov found 41 percent of Americans preferred capitalism to 21 percent favoring socialism, with younger demographics favoring the latter. A May Cato Institute/YouGov poll discovered 62 percent of Americans between 18-29 hold a “favorable view” of socialism, while 34 percent hold similar opinions of Communism. Similarly, an Axios-Generational Lab poll showed socialism besting capitalism among U.S. college students, with 67 percent of survey respondents saying they hold a positive or neutral association with the word “socialism.”
In short, Mamdani’s rise — and Weaver’s sentiments — are bellwethers for America’s possible future, one rife with anti-capitalistic policies. Sadly, they are resonating with the young largely due to educational policies and affordability challenges.
The 250th anniversary of America’s independence could not arrive at a more existential crux. An educational push to confront communism’s destructive nature must be imperative, and promote how free market principles have been the engine behind the country’s independence, economic prosperity, innovation, defensive strength, and charitable philanthropy. Indeed, capitalism is not merely an economic system — but deeply intertwined with America’s identity.
Millions upon millions of immigrants, families, and individuals have benefited from this system, escaping poverty and achieving the American Dream. Yet this Dream can rapidly devolve into a national nightmare if current favorability trends continue. While mass starvation and political purges remain unlikely in the United States for the foreseeable future, socialist and collectivist policies reliably leave societies materially poorer.
At its core, communism’s attack on private property threatens a primordial (or inalienable) aspect of humanity. Private ownership, indeed, is a right, reflecting the dignity of one’s work: that a person should keep what he or she has earned.
Collectivism, conversely, erodes civil society and human dignity, stoking resentment and envy. Nations that have embraced this philosophy have deteriorated much like the once-grand home of Yuri Zhivago. Weaver, and Mamdani, embody and promote this liquidation, and their housing policies — rooted in communist ideology — will lead to capital flight and a reduced tax base, ultimately worsening affordability.
That outcome would not be a “better arrangement” or “more just” for anyone.
READ MORE:
Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s Utopian Future?
The ‘Warmth of Collectivism’ Comes to New York
From Solidarity to Statism: Mayor Mamdani’s Vision for New York City
New Posts (Home)
ChatBox
Popular Posts 
Game Zone
Top PodCasts
