Zohran Mamdani's Win Sparks Debate on Wealth Inequality and Philanthropy

Zohran Mamdani’s recent populist victory in New York’s mayoral primary has sparked broader conversations about wealth inequality and the growing backlash against the elite in American politics [1]. His success is emblematic of a shifting landscape where dissatisfaction with the status quo is fueling political upsets. As Mamdani’s rise highlights, the frustration is not confined to one party or ideology—populists on both the left and right are tapping into a shared sentiment against an elite class perceived as having globalized the economy to its own benefit while leaving many behind [1]. The data supports this perception: the top 10% of American households now own nearly 90% of all business equity, while half of all households own virtually none. Over the same period, the wealthiest 1% have seen their share of the nation’s wealth climb to 26%, while the bottom 80% have experienced a decline from 40% to 30% [1]. Meanwhile, the number of ultra-high-net-worth (UHNW) individuals in the U.S. has risen, and their collective wealth has increased from $11.3 trillion to $17.1 trillion [1]. Yet, despite these gains, philanthropic giving from this group has remained flat at roughly $85 billion annually. The rate of giving has actually declined, from 0.75% of their wealth in 2020 to just 0.5% in 2022 [1]. This vast, under-tapped reservoir of private capital could serve as a powerful engine for change if mobilized effectively. Historian Walter Scheidel has warned that large-scale inequality has historically been reduced not through peaceful reform but through violent means—what he refers to as the “Four Horsemen” of mass-mobilization warfare, transformative revolution, state collapse, and catastrophic pandemics [1]. This underscores the urgency of proactively addressing inequality before it leads to societal upheaval. The article argues that a new form of voluntary action by the ultra-wealthy is essential to create a more equitable society. Many UHNW individuals in the U.S. are self-made entrepreneurs who have not only built financial wealth but also accumulated social, political, and intellectual capital [1]. These individuals are uniquely positioned to leverage their networks, expertise, and influence to drive meaningful change. The article outlines three specific opportunities for catalytic philanthropy: 1. Pre-distributing the gains of automation through initiatives like the Telescope Tech Offset Program (TTOP), which creates an “AI Credit” to help manage the risks of AI-driven job displacement [1]. 2. De-risking social innovation through Pay-for-Success (PFS) contracts, such as the Massachusetts Pathways to Economic Advancement Project, which provides vocational training and career coaching for underserved populations [1]. 3. Democratizing business ownership by facilitating employee buyouts of retiring businesses, which can lead to more resilient companies and greater economic equity [1]. These approaches align with the concept of “catalytic philanthropy,” which goes beyond traditional charity to create self-sustaining systems of social and financial infrastructure [1]. The Mamdani victory serves as a warning to the political establishment and the ultra-wealthy that populist anger is not a passing trend but a structural shift. For the wealthiest Americans, this is a moment of decision: they can either be seen as part of the problem or become active partners in building a more equitable and resilient economy [1]. Source: [1] title: I’ve helped some of New York’s wealthiest ramp up their giving. Zohran Mamdani’s rise reveals the urgency — and opportunity — for all of us to meet the moment (https://fortune.com/2025/08/08/zohran-mamdani-wealth-inequality-philanthropy-how-to-give-back/)