New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani made clear his vision for immigration enforcement during a recent appearance on MSNBC’s “The Weekend.” His prescription? Abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement entirely, claiming the agency’s practices embody unreformable cruelty.
This stance, once a fringe position, aligns with a growing chorus on the left that treats federal efforts to secure borders and deport criminals as moral atrocities rather than necessary functions of a sovereign nation.
Mamdani’s comments came in response to reports of conditions at a detention facility in New Jersey, where he expressed “pain” over what he described as offensive conditions endemic to immigration enforcement. He positioned sanctuary city policies and executive orders shielding local agencies from cooperation with ICE as points of pride for New York. For Mamdani and like-minded progressives, the very existence of an agency tasked with upholding immigration law represents not order, but oppression.
This rhetoric echoes the “Abolish ICE” movement that gained traction in the late 2010s and has resurfaced with vigor. Rather than address the root causes of strained detention systems—such as record illegal crossings and overwhelmed facilities—the solution proposed is to eliminate enforcement altogether.
One wonders: if ICE is dismantled, who exactly will handle the removal of individuals who have entered the country unlawfully, often with criminal records? The implication seems to be that open borders, or something approaching them, represent the humane path forward.
Critics rightly point out the disconnect between such idealism and the realities faced by American citizens. New York City, under sanctuary policies, has grappled with significant strains on housing, healthcare, and public safety resources amid large-scale migrant arrivals.
Mamdani’s uncompromising stance prioritizes non-citizens, including those with pending removal orders, over the rule of law and the security of residents who expect their government to maintain basic sovereignty.
History offers sobering lessons on the consequences of weakened borders. Nations that fail to control entry invite not only economic burdens but cultural fragmentation and security risks. The United States Constitution grants the federal government clear authority over naturalization and immigration, a power exercised to preserve the republic for its people.
Treating enforcement agencies as inherently cruel undermines this foundational principle, replacing it with a borderless ideology that demands citizens subsidize unlimited migration.
Proponents of abolition often highlight isolated incidents or alleged facility shortcomings while downplaying the crimes committed by individuals who remain in the country due to lax enforcement. Federal data consistently shows that ICE operations target threats to public safety, yet these efforts are framed as systemic brutality. This inversion of priorities—shielding lawbreakers while decrying those who uphold the law—reveals a deeper philosophical divide.
Mamdani’s call for a “new vision” for the Democrat Party, one “unflinching” and “uncompromising,” signals an embrace of radicalism over pragmatism. Past experiments with reduced enforcement, such as catch-and-release policies, have correlated with surges in illegal immigration and associated costs. The American people, through their representatives, have repeatedly affirmed support for secure borders, not their abolition.
In the face of such proposals, it is worth recalling the biblical charge to nations and leaders: “For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil” (Romans 13:4).
Government bears responsibility to wield authority justly, including the maintenance of order and protection of citizens—a principle that applies as much to immigration as to any other domain of law.
Mamdani’s position may resonate in certain activist circles, but it risks accelerating the very disorder it claims to alleviate. True compassion does not require surrendering sovereignty or ignoring the rule of law. It demands clear-eyed discernment: securing the border, enforcing existing statutes, and reforming the system to welcome legal immigrants while removing those who threaten the common good. Anything less invites the very cruelty of chaos that open-border advocates profess to oppose.
Two Storms, One Harvest
Every food crisis in living memory has been a one-shock event. The 2008 price spike was a commodity bubble. The 2020 shortages were a logistics failure. The 2022 grain scare was a war on one exporter’s ports. Each time, the system bent, adjusted, and recovered, and each time the experts assured us afterward that global markets are simply too big and too diversified to fail.
What nobody in Washington seems eager to discuss is that 2026 is shaping up to be something the modern food system has never actually faced. Two independent shocks, one climatic and one geopolitical, are converging on the same harvest cycle at the same time. Not sequentially. Simultaneously.
Start with the weather. The Pacific Ocean is currently building toward what forecasters now openly call a record event. NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center puts the odds of at least a strong El Niño near 88 percent, with roughly two in three odds it reaches “very strong” status, the tier reserved for perhaps three or four events in the entire satellite era. Every major global model now projects a median peak in Super El Niño territory, and most of them project it exceeding the 2015-16 event, which until now held the modern record. Sea surface anomalies were already brushing the super threshold in mid-July, months before these events normally peak. The atmosphere has already shifted into El Niño mode, and the event is forecast to crest in late fall and early winter.
This is not about “climate change.” It’s about the standard cycles of weather, and the cycle we’re currently in is one that has likely devastated societies in the past. We’re better prepared as a society today, but not all Americans are equally prepared.
Serious households have started doing the quiet math on their own. Grocery bills tell part of the story, and the forecast maps tell the rest, which is why long-term food storage has moved from fringe hobby to mainstream line item in the family budget, with established suppliers like Heaven’s Harvest seeing demand from people who five years ago would have rolled their eyes at the idea. That instinct is not paranoia. It is pattern recognition, and the pattern is worth walking through carefully.
Editor’s Note: Heaven’s Harvest IS a sponsor, but the warnings of this article are real and would be written even if we didn’t have a survival food sponsor. With that said, those who take advantage of what they offer can use promo code “Patriot” for 15% off.
The Fertilizer Clock Is Already Running
While the Pacific warms, the second shock has been unfolding in the Strait of Hormuz. The conflict with Iran turned the world’s most important energy chokepoint into a contested waterway, and the consequences reach far beyond the gas pump. Roughly a third of global fertilizer trade moves through Hormuz, and the disruption sent urea prices up 86 percent year over year by March, with a 53 percent jump in a single month.
The World Bank projects energy prices rising about 24 percent in 2026 and fertilizer about 31 percent. By its own accounting, fertilizer prices ran 35 percent higher in the first five months of this year than the same period last year.
Here is the mechanism the nightly news will not explain. Fertilizer is not a grocery item. It is a time-delayed input. The nitrogen a farmer in Iowa or Punjab could not afford to apply this spring does not show up as a problem this spring. It shows up as a thinner harvest six to twelve months later.
The World Bank’s own food security brief concedes that the effects of reduced applications earlier this season “are likely to become visible only later in harvest outcomes.” Translate that from institutional language into plain English and it means this. The damage is already done, it is already in the ground, and we are simply waiting for it to arrive on the shelf.
Now check the calendar. Six to twelve months from the spring planting season lands us squarely in late 2026 and early 2027. Which is precisely when the strongest El Niño in the instrumental record is forecast to peak, bringing its signature droughts to Southeast Asia, Australia, southern Africa, northern Brazil, and South Asia, the very regions that grow the world’s rice, sugar, and oilseeds.
The World Bank warns openly that a strong El Niño “could disrupt multiple crop belts simultaneously” on top of the conflict-driven input costs. Their baseline projection assumes the Middle East disruptions ease by autumn. What in the last two years of Middle East history suggests that assumption is safe?
The System Has No Slack Left
The comfortable answer is that global markets always adjust. But adjustment requires slack, and the slack is gone. Global cereal production is expected to decline from last year’s records even before El Niño does its work. The UN World Food Programme, hardly a den of right-wing preppers, is calling this the most significant disruption to its supply chains since Covid and the invasion of Ukraine, and its supply chain director put the stakes bluntly.
Today’s supply chain challenges are tomorrow’s hunger crisis.
There is also a political dimension that markets cannot price. When food gets scarce, governments do not behave like economists. They behave like politicians. Export bans, hoarding mandates, and panic buying at the national level turned the modest rice shortfall of 2008 into a global crisis, and analysts are already warning that import-dependent nations are the first dominoes.
The 2015-16 Super El Niño, a far weaker event than what is now forecast, threw tens of millions into food stress across Africa and Asia. This one is projected to be stronger, and it arrives with fertilizer already rationed by price and shipping lanes already contested by missiles.
What Joseph Knew
Scripture does not treat preparation for lean years as faithlessness. It treats it as wisdom delivered in advance to those willing to act on it.
Behold, there come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt: And there shall arise after them seven years of famine; and all the plenty shall be forgotten in the land of Egypt.
Joseph did not respond to that warning with a hashtag or a committee. He stored grain during the years of abundance, and when the famine came, Egypt stood while its neighbors begged. The lesson is not that famine is certain. It is that the time to prepare is precisely when preparation still looks optional.
Nobody who filled a pantry in a year of plenty has ever regretted it, and nobody standing in an empty aisle has ever been glad he waited for certainty.
None of this calls for panic, and panic is the enemy of sound judgment anyway. It calls for the same unglamorous prudence our grandparents considered ordinary. Keep some cash margin, know your local growers, and put real food in deep storage while it is cheap and available, because the entire arc of this story is that cheap and available is a closing window.
Families looking for a straightforward place to start can visit Heaven’s Harvest and use promo code Patriot for 15 percent off long-term storable food. The forecasts may yet soften, the strait may yet reopen, and we should pray they do. But hope is a fine thing to hold and a foolish thing to eat.
