The suit’s Enduring Power: From Colonial Legacy to Zohran Mamdani’s Millennial Appeal
A suit can be a subtle performance of masculinity, authority, and power.
The author reflects on their own infrequent suit-wearing experiences, recalling a purchase from a Tokyo department store that initially conveyed sophistication but now feels dated. This experience, they suggest, is common among those in the diaspora, whose parents come from countries where the suit held a diffrent significance.
The suit’s decline is also tied to its cyclical nature. Like jeans, suit silhouettes evolve with the times, and a particular cut can quickly become outdated. Currently, looser-fitting suits reminiscent of Richard Gere’s iconic Armani suit in American Gigolo are gaining popularity, but the cost of staying current can be prohibitive. Despite this, tailoring sales have increased by over 20% in the past year, according to John Lewis, as consumers seek to invest in something “special.”
Mamdani’s preference for Suitsupply, a Dutch label in the £400-£1,200 price range, is telling.Guy points out that Mamdani is a product of his background – a young, middle-class individual whose choice resonates with his likely supporters: college graduates in their 30s and 40s, often grappling with the cost of housing.His suit doesn’t contradict his progressive policies, such as rent freezes and affordable housing initiatives. “You could never imagine Donald Trump wearing Suitsupply; he’s a Brioni person,” Guy states, highlighting the contrast between Mamdani’s accessible style and Trump’s opulent displays of wealth.
the history of suits in politics is rich with symbolism, from Barack Obama’s “shocking” tan suit to the polished appearances of Justin Trudeau and Emmanuel Macron, and the colorful jackets of Angela Merkel. as jeremy Corbyn discovered, the suit isn’t merely clothing; it shapes perception.
Dr. Matthew Sterling Benson-Strohmayer, an economic historian at the London School of Economics, describes Mamdani’s choice as a “performance of banality,” leveraging the suit’s ancient association with political power while projecting a studied modesty. Though, Benson-Strohmayer also emphasizes that the suit is not neutral, acknowledging its origins in military and colonial management. He argues that for individuals from marginalized groups, the suit can serve as “protective armour,” a way to signal legitimacy in spaces where it might otherwise be questioned.
This “code-switching” is not new. Even Mohandas Gandhi, a symbol of anti-colonial simplicity, once wore a three-piece suit during his training as a barrister in London. Similarly,Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has recently adopted a black suit,albeit without a tie,as a shift from his usual fatigues.
In every detail of Mamdani’s public image, the tension between belonging and otherness is visible. The author reflects on the awkwardness of adopting traditions or cultures not originally built for them,and recognizes that Mamdani’s sartorial choices underscore a essential truth: in politics,appearance is never neutral.
