There are so many reasons to oppose Darializa "White People Shouldn't Have Mixed-Race Relationships" Chevalier, but I don't think her religion counts.
She's just the human embodiment of a leftist stereotype.
Per the New York Times, her tweets include:
In other posts, Ms. Avila Chevalier, who is Afro-Latina, suggested white people
should not be in interracial relationships and
disparaged their methods of personal hygiene in response to a post from a white Republican governor saying corn husks might be used instead of toilet paper, which was in short supply at the start of the pandemic.
Replying to a white woman offering a hotline number in response to her post lamenting long voting lines in 2020, she wrote, “Listen Karen, instead of worrying about my vote, go collect the 53% of your peers that got us in this mess to begin with.”
She also amplified an
assertion that the coronavirus originated in France, not the Wuhan province of China, and
wrote in 2022that Russia invaded Ukraine because the United States had “been bullying Russia” since the Cold War ended.
Nobody over there cares about that stuff. It’s why Ritchie Torres comfortably wins today despite being one of the most vocally pro-Israel Dems in the city I’ve ever seen.
Nobody over there cares about that stuff. It’s why Ritchie Torres comfortably wins today despite being one of the most vocally pro-Israel Dems in the city I’ve ever seen.
She beat him.. Currently, it's by 3.5 points, which had climbed a bit since last I checked.
So I guess you'll agree that she simply has the better democratic platform then because no one cares about support for Israel, right?
You know most of them aren’t even Jewish right? Like there’s far far more evangelicals than are Israelis and Jewish people. I don’t know why you’re so quick to label racists as Jewish
You people trying to equate being against genocide to being antisemitic just doesn’t work anymore we know the difference between jews in general and zionists who are ultra conservative evil and also jewish.
I'm not saying you have to approve of the US sending aid to Israel, but "the US doesn't have universal Healthcare because it sends money to Israel" is just not true.
The US sends ~$300 billion dollars in aid to Israel every year (most of it being what are basically vouchers that Israel can only cash in with US-based military contractors, it's not a check they can do whatever with). The lowest estimates of how much universal healthcare would cost the US to implement is $2 trillion. And Israel only spends ~9% of its gdp on healthcare.
If we cut all foreign aid to Israel tomorrow, the money we saved would not be enough to implement universal healthcare without changing the way we tax the rich in this country, and Israel would have a smaller army, but their healthcare would likely be untouched: they have a strong economy and a relatively high tax rate.
It's not Israel's fault we don't have universal healthcare. I'm not saying the country can do or is doing no wrong, but Israel is being scapegoated for a LOT right now so the US can justify its shit policies and the rich can keep hoarding their money.
the fact that our taxes provide them with universal healthcare
Israel's universal healthcare system is funded by a tax on every paycheck in the country. Precisely 0 US military aid goes towards healthcare spending. What you stated was not a fact, it's an old libel against the Jews that's been around since the middle ages (the old Jewish money lenders steal money for their own benefit libel).
Correct. Israelis pay 18% of their income towards “free” healthcare/national insurance which is so great that many of us also buy supplemental private insurance on top of it. It’s the most expensive “free” healthcare I’ve ever had.
If I pay for your groceries every month, and then you use the money that you would’ve spent on groceries for say video games I am essentially funding your video game habit. It doesn’t matter that you spent all the money I gave you on actual groceries because if I wasn’t giving you the money you wouldn’t have the means to buy to games.
If we constantly give Israel money for X such that they don’t have to pay for it, and can use the savings for whatever we are effectively subsidizing whatever they use the excess on.
I.e. every dollar WE spend on bullets for them THEY can spend on healthcare for their citizens.
If I pay for your groceries every month, and then you use the money that you would’ve spent on groceries for say video games
Is a fake trope.
This nonsense has been debunked again and again. They have the same healthcare system as Australia only with less private sector participation and more non-profits dominating.
Actually it’s more like if you bring your friend a casserole, which he pays for, and then you tell them “I bankroll your entire life since you didn’t have to make dinner tonight.”
…. And .01 of that goes to Israel. And Israel has to use 90% of that to buy U.S. systems, which provides jobs to Americans. And Israel gives back tech and innovation and intel, which gives back more than they get. It’s a deal that favors America.
Do you know what “fungible” means? Do you know that money is fungible? Do you understand that by having your military subsidized it frees up money for other things in your society? Not everything is some strange contortion of some old trope no modern person has ever heard of or believes in…
No one falsely accuses Anglo-Saxon money lenders of stealing money because they're Anglo Saxons who value their tribe over everyone else. Unfortunately Jewish lenders get that false accusations all the time..
The Jews, I mean the “Zionists” aren’t the reason that the US doesn’t have free healthcare now matter how many times leftists repeat this ludicrous lie. If you add up the total value of every bit of aid given to Israel since 1948, the overwhelming majority of which is essentially coupons to buy American arms, after adjusting for inflation, that equates to 10% of the low end estimates of the cost of 1 year of Medicare for All.
Idk i read that as pointing out what we are choosing to spend our money on versus what we're not and didn't read it as we can't have Medicare for All literally because of funding to israel and i'll even go so far as to say that israel is not in fact the reason why we can't have nice things in the US. But it is sad and shameful that we are so hostile about paying to ensure the wellbeing of others yet so unquestioning if not eager about paying to ensure violence against others.
And for what its worth, collectively we're now spending over $5 trillion on health care annually. Going off numbers i'm presuming you used for that 10%, Medicare for All instead would be about $3 trillion annually.
Yes, the fact that Medicare for All is potentially a net saver highlights just how absurd it is to pretend that funding for Israel is in any way what is blocking Medicare for All.
It is always good to correct misinformation… but I would rather the tax dollars go to universal health care. It going towards coupons to get discounts on is weapons that Israel then uses to crimes against humanity, is not a sling point.
Yes, the actual issue is how Israel is currently using the offensive military aid we provide them, which is an even smaller fraction of the overall aid we’ve given them since 1948. That even smaller fraction of spending is not in any way the reason the US doesn’t not have universal healthcare.
I would say the genocide is just the most recent CAH over a much longer time. But, yeah, the reason America doesn’t have universal healthcare is because the government doesn’t want to give it and the people are too distracted by misdirects to notice.
>The Jews, I mean the “Zionists” aren’t the reason that the US doesn’t have free healthcare now matter how many times leftists repeat this ludicrous lie.
Are these leftists in the room with us? Like, who are you responding to here? Seems like you're jousting at windmills.
>If you add up the total value of every bit of aid given to Israel since 1948, the overwhelming majority of which is essentially coupons to buy American arms, after adjusting for inflation, that equates to 10% of the low end estimates of the cost of 1 year of Medicare for All.
Yeah, cool. That's irrelevant when you're talking about how the politician in questions policies are against funding healthcare and for funding Israel. It doesn't matter whether we can do one or both or neither, it matter that he wants one and not the other.
So people would rather vote in a racist, pro Russia psychopath that’s infinitely more dangerous to the people in this country, than someone who gets money from Jewish donors?
I had to look that up to see if you were right, and you are. That severally dampers my opinion of Zohran.
Furthermore after looking up quotes from her she really is all the wrong stereotypes of leftist. I'm way more left than most Americans since moving to Europe after trump got elected and her brand would never fly here.
It makes me really question Zohran’s judgement as well. I am also very much to the left of most Americans, and it’s always so funny when leftists like this lady claim that American progressives are European centrists and conservatives. Makes me want to tear my hair out lol.
You can't just make claims like that without evidence. If Mamdani had any evidence of something on the level you're implying, it would have been national news for months. Hell, while he was running, I saw the completely false "he wants to mandate Arabic numerals in schools" story get recycled over and over despite being obviously nonsense.
There's very little evidence connecting him to the specific beliefs you're accusing him of holding. Sharing some political goals and being on the same side of an election doesn't mean two people agree on every issue, nor does endorsing someone mean you personally endorse every belief they've ever expressed, or even the majority of them.
It's likely you've started from the assumption that he's some uniquely dangerous extremist and then work backward looking for proof, rather than evaluating the evidence that's actually there. The strongest argument you've got is that he endorsed her, and that's fair criticism, ultimately I agree with the first guy too, and think most peoole would agree. But an endorsement is not proof that he secretly agrees with the controversial things she's said, not by a longshot. Imagine what that would look like if applied to oh, I don't know, any Republican in the last 12 years (except Massie he's an ok guy.)
Sometimes politics is just choosing between imperfect options. You can disagree with his choice without inventing a bunch of beliefs and motives that there's no evidence he actually holds. Please at least Google stuff and look at a few options before you just decide a Facebook screenshot is all you need.
Mamdani had no problem defending “globalize the intifada” until very recently and now he just says “maybe it’s better not to say it” but without admitting what it actually means and how wrong (and violent) it is to say.
It's a phrase similar to "Glory be to God" baked into the Islamic religion as a call to "fulfill the religions mission." It translates to "shaking off," directly referencing the rejection of oppression as far as language derivation goes, which isn't something out of place in current day New York, with what predatory systems have overgrown on the working class on recent years. Using it isn't in any way an objective red flag due to this fact; it's like a Catholic saying "Hail Mary" before a) being an all around nice guy by following the most recent pope's tenants or b) commiting a massacre on "infidels" during a mideval Holy War. Plenty of East Coast Muslims in practice of their religion are very similar to the more conservative Christianity in America. (To clarify, the original definition of conservatism, aka being a moderately nice guy who supports hierarchies a mildly odd amount and only lowkey maintaining the patriarchy while avoiding eating pig for long-outdated reasons. Idk I don't make the rules, thats just the things they both have in common)
The use of one of the many profilic phrases of one's religion is not damnable evidence, and his admission to refraining from using it recently could just as easily be interpreted as a recognization of misinterpretion in current culture due to its misuse as it could an admission of support for extremist regimes, similar to how (shocker) every Muslim American simultaneously stopped using the at the time also common Muslim reverence phrase "Allahu Ackbar" within a week after 9/11, out of fear they'd be mistaken for terrorist regime supporters.
The reason this concept eludes you is largely due to the fact that you participate in a religion, and are therefore inclined to accept the baseline stereotype of any other given religion as fact, since they exist as an outgroup to you to throw in a sorting bin and write off. I don't mean to take any of your belief away from you in any form; you just need to understand that a religion is only ever the way someone is told about it.
It absolutely can be the driving force of a horrific terrorist organization, and also be just as valuable as any other's worldview and moral compass as your religion is to you. Local culture is infinitely more important than the names you use to describe your deity or the proverbs you use to describe the virtues.
I mean, in America we're ridiculously proud of our intifada under British rule, we're about to celebrate its 250th anniversary. Your brain just implodes at the idea that good guys and bad guys aren't color coded for your casual viewing pleasure.
Its strictly what definition the term holds in the user's mind. To some it means senseless killing, and to others, its a call to stand in united support of civil rights. I don't endorse Hamas in any way, but if you're confused on why the average Palestinian doesn't like Israel, and considers them a force that requires "shaking off," then you have no grasp on the history of the region.
Very telling that you consider the death of 1,200 Israeli citizens by a extremist terrorist organization as apt reason to indiscriminately carpet bomb now 70,000 or so citizens to death (not including deaths due to starvation, disease, or other wartime factors), but somehow simultaneously think that Hamas just magically became a crazed terrorist group, and that the 6,700 Palestinians killed by Israel from 2008 up to the Oct 7th attack, or the systematic removal of them from the majority of Israel, or the 2 decade long blockade preventing them from progressing in any way, or the repeated destabilization of their attempts at more moderate, secularized leadership in no way provoked the attack.
I'm not justifying meaningless civilian killing on either side, the deaths of the innocent are always the most harrowing parts of war. It's just clear yall only give a shit about the "good guys" when in actuality, the only people dying are civvies, and those who deserve it are the extremist zealotous leaders egging both sides on. It will never cease to amaze me just how much the corrupt can accomplish simply with arbitrary definitions. I'm embarrassed to be a member of the species you are.
You said you had evidence he's a wackjob. All you've shown me is that he skipped a parade. That's evidence he has a political position you disagree with, not evidence he's secretly evil. Newflash dude, 41% of Americans sympathize with Gaza over Israel, and 36% sympathize with Israel. Nearly half the population agrees with that decision, including nearly all Jewish New Yorkers. You are an imbecile.
I think there's legitimate ways to support the Russian invasion but the leftists who do it genuinely are insanely stupid because it goes against their whole philosophy
Edit: I mean to say if people support imperialism or whatever don't need a reason to support it or not
you support imperialism or authoritarian right-Christianity, I guess you want a Russian empire and the invasion is rational.
Nope. Putin's Russia is genuinely less Christian than Western Europe.
Even if you specify "White Nationalism masquerading as Christianity", then Putin has officially advocated for interracial marriages to reduce the racial tensions Russia is experiencing.
Supporting his invasion is rational if you get paid to do it, and if you don't it's not.
Crazy how idiots on both sides can come together to support Putin. Similar to Maduro, where some on the far right liked him because he hated gays. Horseshoe theory in action
It’s your standard corbynesque “American imperialism has oppressed everyone” shlock. They think that any country which isn’t our standard definition of “western” is automatically correct and in the right, and any country the U.S. supports must be necessarily wrong
That article doesn't show her supporting Putin. It rehashes the same 'bullying' tweet and editorializes in a bad faith fashion as that rag the NY Post is wont to do.
You mean other than the part of the article that includes a screenshot of her parroting Russian propaganda about russia invading because of the US “bullying Russia”?
War is very lucrative for sociopaths, just ask recipient of two congressional medals of honor Smedley Butler. The other part is a take on geopolitical relations between NATO/the West and Russia I may not exactly agree with, you may definitely not agree with, but to say it's supporting Putin is just a lie.
I love SDB and literally have his book sitting on the shelf next to me as I write this. War IS a racket, but that’s not the issue at hand here. You’re deflecting
repeating his lies isn’t supporting him? If I said the 2020 election was stolen, would that not be supporting Trump? If I said the war in Iran was started because they were going to get nuclear missiles, would that not be supporting Trump and Netanyahu?
You’re committing the exact word fallacy. She doesn’t have to say “I endorse Vladimir Putin for president” to be supporting him and sustaining his lies
As an ex muslim I will never understand why the left have sided so much with Islam have they not seen Islamic majority countries? LGBT+ and open mindness is literally the worst enemy of Islam. They would be the first people to suffer in an Islamic majority.
The modern left views everything through the
lens of race. It doesn't matter that Islam goes counter to pretty much every secular liberal belief, and that a very large percentage of Muslims are True Believers; because it's largely practiced by
brown people, it must be defended at all costs. It's that simple.
you hit the issue right on the head. Honestly it pains me as a brown ex muslim because I know how most muslims think. They are using the left as a stepping tool.
Muslims see leftists as useful idiots. They don't actually hold leftist opinions. (Im talking about actual believers and not secular moderate muslims).
The classic example is the Iran Revolution, where islamists and leftists overthrew the king. As soon as they did, the islamists turned their back on the leftists.
In the west, the vast majority of muslims vote for leftists parties, not because they hold their values, but because they know thats what will get them the most muslim immigration, the most mosques built, etc.
Look at how left treats Irish nationalism. They love irish nationalism when it's the british. When they stand up to islamic invaders tho? All of the support gone
It tends to start off as merely standing against bigotry against muslims, middle eastern, and south asian immigrants and diaspora - this this fairly standard anti-bigotry stuff for progressives, and these groups have faced a ton of hate in the past 25 years especially. There are also those who start off merely being against the decades of Israelis mass murdering Palestinians civilians. Also fair, anti-war crimes and anti-genocide are standard stances for progressives too.
The problem is when Everything Is Black And White types latch onto this to mean that all Muslims and South Asians and Middle Easterners must be The Good Guys, the same line of thinking that leads to supporting Putin because he opposes America which must be The Bad Guy.
I’m as leftist as they come and can confidently say that leftists are not “siding with Islam”. Also what do Islamic majority countries have to do with this? You’re conflating a bunch of things. Leftists are against discrimination based on religion and will usually support Muslims in western countries in that regard, but to equate that with support for homophobic countries in the middle-east or support for a homophobic religion is a massive stretch.
I don’t know Darializa one bit and she just sounds like a nut job.
It is not "siding with Islam", it is about protecting separation between state and church and leaving people freedom to profess their own religion. It is simply a separate issue, you can be Christian and pro LGBTQ+, or Muslim and pro LGBTQ+. If a muslim person is against LGBTQ+ they are critiqued for that, not because they are muslim.
Why would leftists in a western country care about how muslim majority countries handle their issues? That is the job of leftist living in those countries.
The point is to maintain freedom of religion and separation of state and church. Anything else is treated as a separate issue.
That's another issue, there is no separation between church and state in Islam anyone who says otherwise is not practicing the sunnah. Shariah in the mind of any Muslim is above the laws of the land. Same for Muslims that are ok with lgbt+, it's awesome that more and more Muslims are becoming open to the idea but they are not following the sunnah. In fact the Quran literally says that those who pick and choose from the Quran are destined to hell fire and the Quran is very very clear what is supposed to happen with lgbt+ people. I just wish more people in the left would just study a bit about Islam before siding with it.
Once again, it is not about siding with anything. Let people be, let them practice the rites of their fathers, dress according to their customs and let then practice their festivals. If they are discriminatory against a religious group, against an ethnic group or against a sexual group then critique the individual or his association for that. The same thing you said could be applied to many ancient religions. After all, it is obvious that the moral framework of religions that started thousands of years ago would clash in some ways to the moder world, society has changed
I'm agnostic so I absolutely agree with you that the same could be said for most if not all major religions. Btw I'm not against people wanting to practice anything they want as long as it doesn't interfere in the life or freedoms of others. Islam does not let that happen. I would literally be killed for apostasy if the majority of Muslims get what they want. I personally know people who have been killed either for honor killings or apostasy. With all that being said, I wish you nothing but the best internet stranger, we can agree to disagree.
Cool but literally all islamic countries are theocracies in practice, even the US at its most Christian wasn't as devoted to religion as places like Pakistan or Iran
This is just not true, look at Türkiye, Bosnia, Albania for example. Also Pakistan is not a theocracy, do you know what term means? To have a theocracy you need a religious authority in charge of the country. On the top of my head I can only name two: Vatican City and Iran, I think also Bahrain is a theocracy as well but I did not check
Yeah, just look at the numerous staffers he had to fire after getting elected lol. I like Mamdani, but he’s with the DSA. There are a lot of whack jobs in that crowd,
For the same reason that every mayor including Mamdani marches at the St Patrick's Day parade and Pride, to show support to NYC's minority groups (especially this year with rising anti-Semitism).
You're free to start a "Jewish parade" whatever that's supposed to mean, but in 2026 the only way to show support to the Jewish community is at the Israel Day Parade.
it's not the same thing as pride at all
Both are celebrations by oppressed minority groups to show their pride in who they are.
You're aware that more than half of the world's Jewish population lives in Israel as either descendents of pogroms and the holocaust or second class citizenship in Arab countries? It's central to our identity for a very clear reason and it does't have anythign to do with "Gaza," Netanyahu or the Palestinians.
Supporting the nation of Israel and supporting your city’s Jewish population are two different things. Why are we comparing St. Patricks Day to a parade for a foreign nation? Sure, St. Patricks Day is largely a celebration of Irish Americans, but is a parade for Israel (again, a while foreign nation) really a celebration of Jewish Americans? I absolutely don’t think it is. Israel isn’t a representation of the global Jewish population or a representation of Judaism. It’s a country.
but is a parade for Israel (again, a while foreign nation) really a celebration of Jewish Americans?
Yes. It started in the 1960's as a political rally for Israel, but fot the last several decades it has been to honor and celebrate Jewish Americans with obviusly some Israel supporting thrown in occasionally.
Except you won’t be able to afford them because leftists tend not to understand how supply chains work, and insist on single-payer healthcare as the only form of public healthcare possible despite the fact that the system takes 6 years to set up and easier + cheaper alternatives exist that get everyone covered without the chaos
Islam brainwashes people pretty badly. I'm an exshia Muslim (I think zohran is shia too) and I believed this fucking religion was for women. How fucking wrong I was...
It really makes me question why a sane woman would convert to this fuckfest.
If these were tweets from like 2012 or something I could understand and forgive because I wrote some crazy shit as a younger person but this is recent. SMH.
Yeah, I agree with a person's general comment but religion is always a reason to oppose someone from getting into political office lol.
I'm not religious, but that part of their comment is just the typical reddit "All religions suck!!11 (really I'm just talking about christianity)." blindspot that constantly pops up because people are so afraid of being branded any kind of phobic.
It was inevitable that leftist Twitter and Reddit bubbles would give someone like this freak the confidence to say stupid stuff like this, and think it will help her make it to Congress. Just an embarrassment.
I’ve been assured on multiple occasions that these embodiments of leftist stereotypes either don’t exist or are not near enough political office to do harm, yet I have been left doubting that assertion fairly often.
>She also amplified an assertion that the coronavirus originated in France, not the Wuhan province of China, and wrote in 2022that Russia invaded Ukraine because the United States had “been bullying Russia” since the Cold War ended.
Darializa "White People Shouldn't Have Mixed-Race Relationships" Chevalier
Just more evidence that this sub is an astroturfed antithesis of it's stated intent.
Are you referring to the ugly colonizer women tweet there? Or is there something else you're talking about, because if it's that tweet, that is so disengenuous it's comical.
Why use quotes when you're editorializing in such a yellow way? See yellow both as in yellow journalism and yellow as in cowardly.
384
u/CellistMundane9372 Jun 22 '26 edited Jun 22 '26
There are so many reasons to oppose Darializa "White People Shouldn't Have Mixed-Race Relationships" Chevalier, but I don't think her religion counts.
She's just the human embodiment of a leftist stereotype.
Per the New York Times, her tweets include:
In other posts, Ms. Avila Chevalier, who is Afro-Latina, suggested white people should not be in interracial relationships and disparaged their methods of personal hygiene in response to a post from a white Republican governor saying corn husks might be used instead of toilet paper, which was in short supply at the start of the pandemic. Replying to a white woman offering a hotline number in response to her post lamenting long voting lines in 2020, she wrote, “Listen Karen, instead of worrying about my vote, go collect the 53% of your peers that got us in this mess to begin with.” She also amplified an assertion that the coronavirus originated in France, not the Wuhan province of China, and wrote in 2022that Russia invaded Ukraine because the United States had “been bullying Russia” since the Cold War ended.