X Close

Progressives underestimate the danger of subway disorder

Anti-social behaviour should be prosecuted. Credit: Getty

Anti-social behaviour should be prosecuted. Credit: Getty

28 August 2025 - 7:15pm

Last weekend, the NYPD released images of a man wanted for an assault on the subway — one that was, police say, committed in response to being asked by a senior citizen riding in the same car to stop smoking. The story might easily be overlooked, but it illustrates an important point worth making: many of the “low-level” infractions progressives argue should not be policed often mask something more nefarious.

Whether police should intervene when individuals break what are perceived to be minor rules — like hopping the turnstile, smoking in the subway, and playing music from a speaker in a public place — has been an ongoing debate for as long as I’ve been alive. Progressive police critics helped drive a movement to de-emphasise public order enforcement which culminated with prosecutors and politicians adopting non-enforcement policies and decriminalising such offences.

Some seem to have buyer’s remorse in the wake of recent decriminalisation efforts, as evidenced by both the unseating of many so-called “progressive” prosecutors, and the passage of a number of ballot initiatives countering that push last November.

In New York City, however, Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral Democratic primary victory shows that the debate is not quite settled. Mamdani’s policy proposals include taking the NYPD out of traffic enforcement, decriminalising prostitution, and creating a new department of community safety tasked with addressing crime and disorder by adding to the social safety net.

Ultimately, the discourse about public order enforcement in places like New York City has long been hindered by the fact that so many of the arguments about what, if anything, should be done about antisocial behaviour like playing music on a speaker while riding a public bus rest on three fundamental misapprehensions.

First is the idea that such behaviour is not malicious in nature. Anyone who has endured the indignity of biting their tongue while someone acts blatantly antisocial in public intuitively understands that such behaviour is an expression of power — reinforced by the credible threat of violence. It’s essentially a dare. The guy who lights up a cigarette on a commuter train knows he’s not supposed to; and he’s counting on the fact that it’s going to bother those around him. He expects people to keep quiet about it, and when they do, it feeds his own self-perception as a “tough guy” insofar as he understands fear to be the primary explanation for the silence.

On the off chance that someone does decide to confront the antisocial brute, it gives him an opportunity to express himself through violence or the threat thereof. The Bronx case is just one example. Others include: last year’s stabbing of a Metro North railroad commuter after he protested the loud music of another passenger; the 2023 incident in which a 45-year-old subway rider was assaulted aboard an A train in Brooklyn after asking a group of other passengers to put their cigarettes out; and the 2021 assault and robbery of a 58-year-old Staten Island man after confronting a group of men about their loud music.

These incidents reflect the second misapprehension, which is the false dichotomy so often drawn between “violent” and “non-violent” crimes. The categorisation is relied upon to distinguish the crimes police should respond to and seek to prevent from those that don’t warrant the risk of a police encounter. But in reality, many so-called non-violent offences only lack an element of violence because no one challenged the perpetrator. In truth, retail thieves, low-level drug dealers, and vandals are perfectly willing to resort to violence in order to carry out their crimes.

Lastly, what many progressives fail to appreciate is that — beyond the relief felt by those of us weary of enduring brutish behaviour — policing disorder often produces tangible results, uncovering serious crimes that might otherwise have gone undetected. Earlier this month, NYPD officers stopped a moped carrying three passengers for what might be considered “minor” violations — only to discover that one passenger was illegally in possession of a handgun.

In the end, those arguing that blatantly antisocial behaviour shouldn’t be policed are inviting the decay of our shared spaces. Last weekend’s subway slugging should serve as a reminder to the prosocial among us of what we stand to lose if we allow such public disorder to metastasise.


Rafael A. Mangual is the Nick Ohnell fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, a contributing editor of City Journal, and author of the 2022 book, Criminal (In)Justice.


China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

1 July 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam