If you look at the NDP’s fundraising over the last four elections, it reveals a troubling downward trend for a party already in dire financial straits.
The NDP’s big wins in the last parliament were pharmacare and dental care. So I disagree that they’ve gotten “mired in identity politics”.
Besides, standing up for the human rights and welfare of, say, trans people, indigenous people, or people in Gaza, this is standing up for the human rights and welfare of all of us. Maybe they just need to make that connection clearer.
However, to be clear, Mamdani’s proposals are things like publicly-owned grocery stores and free buses—these are tangible cost-of-living benefits that also happen to align with a greater socialist project.
It is great and necessary to have that broader vision, of course. But being able to articulate tangible, easy-to-understand benefits is also important. The right is very good at making up spooky campfire stories about ‘eating the bugs’ or ‘you will all lose your jobs’ or ‘everything will cost more’.
We need both things. Anyway, I was mostly responding to the notion that identity politics is a) divisive and b) not part of a comprehensive vision.
The NDP’s big wins in the last parliament were pharmacare and dental care. So I disagree that they’ve gotten “mired in identity politics”.
Besides, standing up for the human rights and welfare of, say, trans people, indigenous people, or people in Gaza, this is standing up for the human rights and welfare of all of us. Maybe they just need to make that connection clearer.
You focused on the second part of OPs message, when the first part is more interesting I think.
Small incremental gains, like in pharma and dental, are good to show the NDP’s usefulness but they aren’t a “bigger comprehensive vision”.
The NDP needs a bold vision of the scale of the Leap Manifesto or the Green New Deal.
That would be great too!
However, to be clear, Mamdani’s proposals are things like publicly-owned grocery stores and free buses—these are tangible cost-of-living benefits that also happen to align with a greater socialist project.
It is great and necessary to have that broader vision, of course. But being able to articulate tangible, easy-to-understand benefits is also important. The right is very good at making up spooky campfire stories about ‘eating the bugs’ or ‘you will all lose your jobs’ or ‘everything will cost more’.
We need both things. Anyway, I was mostly responding to the notion that identity politics is a) divisive and b) not part of a comprehensive vision.