Mahmood Mamdani education and career path: How Zohran Mamdani's father built a legacy of revolution through ideas and exile
Zohran Mamdani
As Zohran Mamdani positions himself for one of the most consequential roles in American municipal governance, the mayoralty of New York City, his political philosophy is being examined not only for its content but also for the intellectual tradition from which it emerges.
A democratic socialist with deep grassroots ties and a precise policy instinct, Zohran's approach to power is shaped not just by conviction but by inheritance. This inheritance is not merely biological; it is profoundly intellectual. At the heart of that legacy stands his father, Mahmood Mamdani, a political thinker shaped by exile, rooted in anti-colonial critique, and internationally renowned for reshaping how the world understands state authority and postcolonial governance.
Here is the story of his education and career—the foundation that has indelibly shaped his son's political consciousness.
Mahmood Mamdani's academic journey: How a student of struggle became a scholar of power
Mahmood Mamdani's academic journey is as compelling as his scholarship. Born in 1946 in Bombay and raised in Kampala by Gujarati Muslim parents, his early years were marked by constant movement across East Africa and growing political awareness. Selected as part of the historic Kennedy Airlift initiative in the 1960s, he joined a select cohort of East African students who studied in North America during the decolonisation period.
He earned his undergraduate degree in political science from the University of Pittsburgh, where his commitment to justice took root through civil rights activism. After participating in protests in Montgomery, Alabama, and facing imprisonment for his stance, Mamdani deepened his engagement with revolutionary thought. He went on to complete a Master's at Tufts University and later obtained a PhD in Government from Harvard, where his dissertation on class and politics in Uganda laid the intellectual foundation for his future work.
Mahmood Mamdani's career: A life of scholarship forged in struggle
Mamdani's academic and personal life has been shaped by political upheaval. Shortly after returning to Uganda to conduct doctoral research, he was expelled by Idi Amin for his ethnicity and forced into exile. From the United Kingdom, he moved to Tanzania, joining the University of Dar es Salaam — a crucible for postcolonial thought.
Despite being rendered stateless in the 1980s due to his criticism of Milton Obote's regime, Mamdani continued his work with unrelenting conviction.
He returned to Uganda after Obote's fall and became the founding director of the Centre for Basic Research, one of the country's first independent think tanks. His academic career spanned institutions across the globe, including the University of Cape Town, Princeton, and Columbia University, where he currently teaches in the departments of Government, Anthropology, and African Studies.
His scholarship remains foundational in the study of colonialism, authoritarianism, and the politics of knowledge.
In his landmark work Citizen and Subject, Mamdani argued that the colonial state in Africa operated through a bifurcated system — one that simultaneously created urban civil power for citizens and rural authoritarian rule over subjects. This analytical framework challenged the conventional understanding of apartheid and extended far beyond South Africa.
His writings continue to inform how academics and policymakers understand the enduring legacies of colonial governance and state violence.
For Zohran Mamdani, these were not distant theories, but lived realities, discussed, debated, and dissected within his own home.
Mahmood Mamdani's legacy finds its voice in Zohran's politics
Where Mira Nair offered her son a global lens for storytelling and empathy, Mahmood Mamdani provided him with the intellectual tools to interrogate power and structure. Zohran's political style — principled yet strategic, radical yet methodical — carries clear echoes of his father's analytical discipline.
In his advocacy for housing justice, immigrant rights, and racial equity, Zohran channels not only the urgency of social movements but also the clarity of postcolonial critique.
His is a politics informed not just by protest, but by a lifetime immersed in theory, history, and the study of systems that marginalise and exclude.
In a political age often defined by spectacle and short-termism, Zohran Mamdani's approach stands apart. It is grounded in an education shaped by two of the most dynamic thinkers of their generation. Mahmood Mamdani did not simply shape academic discourse — he cultivated a worldview in his son that merges scholarship with service, resistance with reform, and vision with action. The intellectual lineage that Zohran carries into public life is not just an inheritance; it is a compass.
Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
38 minutes ago
- First Post
Despite bombs, backlash: Why Iran's nuclear programme matters to it
A preliminary US intelligence report indicates Iran's nuclear programme could resume within one to two months despite weekend strikes on sites like Fordow and Natanz. Trump insists the facilities were 'obliterated', but analysts say satellite imagery cannot fully reveal underground damage. Iran's pursuit of uranium enrichment dates to 1957 and reflects its enduring quest for independence read more Members of the Iranian Parliament participate in a vote of trust for the cabinet of President Masoud Pezeshkian at the parliament in Tehran, Iran, August 21, 2024. File Image/WANA via Reuters Targeted airstrikes by the United States and Israel over the weekend aimed to neutralise Iran's uranium enrichment capabilities. While senior US officials and US President Donald Trump have declared the operation a strategic success, conflicting assessments from the American intelligence community and historical context suggest a far more nuanced picture. Did the US strikes achieve their objective? According to sources familiar with a preliminary US intelligence assessment, the American strikes on key nuclear sites in Iran — including Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan — have caused damage that might delay the programme by only a few months. Three individuals with access to the classified findings indicated to Reuters that the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA), which produced the initial report, assessed that Iran could resume uranium enrichment activities within as little as one to two months. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD These estimates stand in stark contrast to statements from the Trump administration. While addressing reporters at the NATO summit in The Hague, Trump acknowledged the ambiguity in the intelligence — 'The intelligence was … very inconclusive' — but asserted, 'I think we can take the 'we don't know.' It was very severe. It was obliteration.' He went further to claim, 'Iran's nuclear deal had been set back basically decades, because I don't think they'll ever do it again.' This position was echoed by White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt, who responded to reports about the assessment by stating: 'Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000-pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration.' Despite these pronouncements, officials involved in the intelligence review have pointed out that the report includes several uncertainties, conditions and is expected to evolve as more data becomes available. A US official, speaking anonymously to Reuters, confirmed that even now, Washington does not fully grasp the scale of the impact on Iran's nuclear infrastructure. Evaluating the destruction of highly fortified sites like Fordow, located deep underground, remains technically difficult, especially if assessments rely on satellite imagery. A satellite image shows the Fordow nuclear facility in Iran, January 24, 2025. Maxar Technologies via Reuters The DIA is also not the only agency responsible for the damage assessment. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD What if Iran had a bomb? Debates about Iran's nuclear capabilities inevitably raise the question: what happens if Tehran crosses the threshold and becomes a nuclear-armed state? Analysts hold divergent views — ranging from alarm over regional instability to cautious recognition of nuclear deterrence dynamics. While fears of Iran sharing nuclear material with non-state actors or extremist groups exist, history offers limited precedent for such scenarios. According to the Arms Control Association, only one known case — the Soviet Union's transfer of uranium-235 to China in the 1950s — ever involved a state transferring bomb-grade material to another actor. More relevant is how a nuclear Iran would reshape its security calculus in West Asia. Nuclear weapons, particularly for a country like Iran, are seen less as tools of aggression and more as strategic deterrents. These weapons could serve multiple deterrence objectives: dissuading conventional military aggression from regional non-nuclear states, forestalling nuclear threats from powers like Israel, India or Pakistan, and deterring interventions by external powers such as the United States or Russia. Analysts often reference the doctrine of 'proportional deterrence,' a concept initially crafted in Cold War-era France. It proposes that a relatively less capable nuclear state can still effectively deter stronger nuclear adversaries by threatening to destroy high-value targets, even while absorbing significant damage itself. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This form of second-strike capability ensures that any country contemplating an attack must reckon with irreversible consequences. This logic, however, cuts both ways. Iran itself remains vulnerable to deterrence by Israel's nuclear arsenal, and even its missile advancements may not necessarily indicate nuclear ambitions. Some experts argue that Iran's precision missile development could be aimed at bolstering conventional deterrence — targeting strategic sites in Israel or elsewhere without resorting to nuclear arms. While a nuclear-armed Iran would not automatically destabilise the region, the psychological and political implications would be profound. The sheer perception of a shift in power dynamics could alter regional alignments, defence planning and diplomatic engagements. Most crucially, however, it is unlikely that regional or global powers will allow Iran to acquire such a capability uncontested. How did Iran's nuclear programme come about? Iran's nuclear journey began not in defiance, but under American sponsorship. In 1957, the US and Iran launched a civil nuclear partnership as part of the 'Atoms for Peace' initiative. By the 1970s, under the pro-Western Shah, Iran was planning an ambitious programme that included building 23 nuclear reactors. Washington, including then-US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, raised no objection. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Iran's nuclear development was envisioned as a symbol of modernity and a tool for regional leadership, with plans to export electricity to neighbouring states. But the Iranian Revolution of 1979 transformed the landscape entirely. The ousting of the Shah and the rise of the Islamic Republic introduced a new political order driven by anti-imperialist rhetoric and religious ideology. Western fears of weaponisation of Iran's nuclear capabilities began almost immediately. Iran's insistence on the right to enrich uranium has been a flashpoint in every round of nuclear negotiations since. To many in Washington, this insistence is incomprehensible if Iran's aims are purely peaceful. As US Vice President JD Vance remarked: 'It's one thing to want civilian nuclear energy. It's another thing to demand sophisticated enrichment capacity. And it's still another to cling to enrichment while simultaneously violating basic non-proliferation obligations and enriching right to the point of weapons-grade uranium.' Iran, however, has consistently maintained that its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes. It remains a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), under which it has pledged not to develop a nuclear weapon. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has issued multiple fatwas condemning nuclear arms as 'un-Islamic.' So why is Iran's nuclear programme so important to it? The roots of Iran's nuclear intransigence run deep — far deeper than its centrifuges. One of the revolution's founding principles, as handwritten by Ayatollah Khomeini in a 1979 declaration, was 'independence.' This idea, grounded in a long history of colonial subjugation, remains central to the Islamic Republic's identity. Iran's experience of foreign domination stretches back centuries: squeezed between Russian and British imperialism in the 19th century, subjected to the exploitation of oil resources by British corporations in the 20th, and politically undermined by direct foreign interventions. In 1953, the US and UK orchestrated a coup to remove then-Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh after he sought national control over Iran's oil. This episode is widely regarded as a defining national trauma. Author and analyst Vali Nasr, in his work Iran's Grand Strategy, traces Iran's emphasis on nuclear self-sufficiency back to this legacy of external coercion. He argues that the drive for civil nuclear power and the right to enrich uranium is not just about energy — it is about reclaiming sovereignty. 'Before the revolution itself, before the hostage crisis or US sanctions, before the Iran-Iraq war or efforts to export the revolution… the future supreme religious guide and leader of Iran valued independence from foreign influence as equal to the enshrining principles of Islam in the state,' Nasr notes. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Khamenei himself once explained the significance of the revolution by stating, 'now all decisions are made in Tehran.' This desire for autonomy — manifested in Iran's refusal to rely on imported enriched uranium from countries like Russia — has consistently obstructed nuclear agreements. Yet, from Iran's perspective, conceding on enrichment would be tantamount to surrendering the very ideals upon which the Islamic Republic was built. Also Watch: With inputs from agencies
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
NYC Democratic Mayoral Primary: All about Zohran Mamdani's educational qualifications
Who says you've got a shot to make history only if/when you come out of Ivy League Schools! Zohran Kwame Mamdani sure is clearly going against the current and proving otherwise! Mamdani is making history, paving the path for the same since the last few months – with his grounded approach, bold aspirations, and a feel-good campaign that has occupied space over every corner of social media – while establishing his presence across the streets and boroughs of New York City. As much fun, hopeful, assuring, and serotonin-inducing as his campaign has been – the result of the same has given him back tenfold. Scripting history, the 33-year-old has emerged as the Democratic nominee for New York City mayor. After Andrew Cuomo, the former (and 'disgraced') governor of NYC, decided to concede, saying, 'Tonight is his night,' Mamdani secured his seat as the Democratic nominee for the 2025 New York City mayoral election, set to occur on November 4. Mamdani will be contesting against the incumbent, Eric Adams, who was elected mayor on the Democratic Party line in 2021, but is seeking re-election to a second term as an independent – despite being indicted on federal corruption charges in September 2024 and facing calls to resign from office. Now, looking at Mamdani's meteoric socio-political rise at such a young age, one might think that he must have an equally polished academic background. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Trade Bitcoin & Ethereum – No Wallet Needed! IC Markets Start Now Undo Turns out – although it's impressive in its own right – Mamdani's eduactional qualifications are more substantial than glamorous and boisterous. The humble upbringing Born in Kampala, Uganda, Zohran Kwame Mamdani (his middle name pays tribute to Ghana's Pan-African leader Kwame Nkrumah) began a childhood that would travel different continents and various cultures. At age five, his family fled Uganda and moved to Cape Town, South Africa, where he attended St. George's Grammar School, an institution steeped in colonial history and academic rigor. At seven, the family relocated to New York City, settling on the Upper West Side. There, Zohran attended the Bank Street School for Children, a progressive institution emphasizing experiential learning, social justice, and civic responsibility. Apart from being the child of Mira Nair (an acclaimed feminist filmmaker, who often incorporates political and social commentary in her work) and Mahmood Mamdani (a renowned scholar with anti-colonial scholarship and activism), this early exposure to democratic education complemented his later academic pursuits. In his teenage years, Zohran's academic path led to the prestigious Bronx High School of Science, known for its intense focus on STEM and intellectual curiosity. Although he could not get into Stuyvesant High School, located in Lower Manhattan and widely celebrated as one of the nation's most prestigious public secondary schools, Mamdani took that into his stride. And as one would have foreseen, Mamdani's engagement extended beyond classrooms – he co-founded the school's first cricket team, entering the Public School Athletic League and reflecting early leadership and organizational aptitude. Infusing academics and activism: Following his New York City public school trajectory, Zohran enrolled at Bowdoin College, a liberal arts institution in Maine. There, he pursued a Bachelor's degree in Africana Studies, graduating in 2014. This field of study is interdisciplinary, encompassing history, politics, culture, and identities rooted in Africa and its diaspora, aligning deeply with his values in equity, anti-colonialism, and justice. At Bowdoin, his activism flourished. He co-founded the campus chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine, signaling both early political engagement and a willingness to challenge institutional norms. As he later reflected: "We can't separate the classroom from political issues.' This academic-activist mindset became a cornerstone of his political identity. From a clean slate to an emerging star: Mamdani's background is humble, not too bragworthy. But what is imbued in his upbringing is his deep sense of socio-political philosophy that has become the guiding principle in his professional life as a public representative. For Zohran, education was not only personal – it was familial. His father, Mahmood Mamdani, taught political science and anthropology at Columbia University, publishing widely on colonialism. His mother, Mira Nair, is a globally celebrated filmmaker whose works examine race, diaspora, and power. Their dinner table was described as a space for deep, global political conversation. While this rich intellectual and cultural upbringing exposed Zohran to critical thinking, storytelling, and the power of ideas, he arts and humanities blended with political theory, giving him a compelling ability to frame policies not just in data, but in narrative and human experience. On the ground with NYC's contact tracers
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Iran-Israel conflict: Donald Trump recaps 24 hours timeline - From Tehran attack on US airbase to ceasefire violation
File photo: US President Donald Trump, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Image credit: AP) In the last 24 hours, the Israel-Iran war took several dramatic turns, with US President Donald Trump making fast diplomatic moves to present himself as a peacekeeper in the conflict. The world watched closely as tensions rose, first with Iran striking back at the US, and then with Trump suddenly announcing a ceasefire. But soon after, he expressed anger over both hostile countries - Israel and Iran not fully following the peace deal. Monday afternoon: Iran strikes US military base in Qatar Tensions spiked Monday afternoon when Iran retaliated for earlier US strikes by firing missiles at the Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, the largest American military base in the region. The missiles were intercepted with help from Qatar, and no injuries or major damage were reported. Despite earlier warnings of a strong response, President Donald Trump downplayed the attack in a social media post around 4pm ET, calling it "very weak" and "very effectively countered", as reported by ABC. He added, 'I am pleased to report that NO Americans were harmed, and hardly any damage was done. Most importantly, they've gotten it all out of their 'system,' and there will, hopefully, be no further HATE.' Trump also thanked Iran for giving advance warning and expressed hope that both Iran and Israel would now move towards peace. Monday evening: Trump announces ceasefire Just after 6pm ET, Trump stunned observers by announcing a ceasefire agreement that he claimed would end the 12-day war. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Türk kredi kartı kullanıcıları bunu okumalı. HANGİKREDİ Daha Fazla Oku Undo According to him, the deal involved two 12-hour ceasefire phases, first led by Iran and then by Israel, after which a full stop to the war would be declared. Speaking to NBC News, Trump said, 'It's a great day for America. It's a great day for the Middle East. I'm very happy to have been able to get the job done.' He added that the ceasefire would last "forever." At 1:08am ET, he declared on Truth Social, 'THE CEASEFIRE IS NOW IN EFFECT. PLEASE DO NOT VIOLATE IT!' However, neither Iran nor Israel issued immediate public confirmation of the agreement. Overnight: Israel and Iran continue fire exchange Despite the ceasefire declaration, fresh fighting broke out overnight. Iran fired missiles into Israel, reportedly killing four people and injuring 20 in Beersheba. Iran claimed 15 deaths in Israeli strikes around its territory. Israel accused Iran of violating the ceasefire by launching missiles between midnight and 3:30am ET, which were either intercepted or landed in open areas. Iran denied the charge, but Israel admitted to launching a retaliatory strike on a radar site near Tehran. Tuesday morning: Trump lashes out at Israel and Iran By Tuesday morning, Trump was visibly frustrated. Before heading to a Nato summit in the Netherlands, he made pointed remarks about both countries. 'Israel as soon as we made the deal, they came out and dropped a boatload of bombs the likes of which I've never seen before,' he told reporters. 'I'm not happy with Israel. Ok, when I say now you have 12 hours, you don't go out in the first hour and just drop everything you have on them. So, I'm not happy with him. I'm not happy with Iran either.' His most candid comment came when he said, 'We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard, that they don't know what the f--- they're doing.' Trump warns Israel on social media Soon after, Trump posted a stern message on social media warning Israel not to continue strikes on Iran: 'ISRAEL is not going to attack Iran. All planes will turn around and head home, while doing a friendly 'Plane Wave' to Iran. Nobody will be hurt, the Ceasefire is in effect!' Later, he had a phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu . According to White House sources, Trump was direct in urging Israel to avoid further action. Israel's government said it held back from more attacks following that call. Iran, meanwhile, stated that it would continue respecting the ceasefire as long as Israel did too. As of Tuesday afternoon By Tuesday afternoon, the situation appeared calmer. There were no new reports of missile exchanges, and both sides seemed to be observing the ceasefire. It was a fragile calm, but one that gave Trump a moment to claim that his diplomatic gamble had paid off—at least for now.
