this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2025
60 points (98.4% liked)

Canada

10284 readers
556 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

they need bolder policies, a bigger comprehensive vision, and to avoid getting mired in divisive identity politics.

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.

[–] patatas@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 days ago

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.