The long game

2 min read · November 29, 2025
New Power Labs

For decades, movements seeking to restrict rights and reshape public institutions have invested in patient, long-horizon strategies. They fund ideological infrastructure – political organizing, media ecosystems, legal advocacy, and cultural narratives – over 20–30 year timelines. This steady, layered investment has allowed certain ideas to take root and gain influence across systems.

By contrast, those working to strengthen democracy, protect rights, and advance inclusion are often constrained by short cycles, incremental funding, and near-term expectations for measurable outcomes. The mismatch is structural: one side builds for a generation; the other plans for a grant period.

Our sector’s tendency to fund narrowly and briefly puts us at a disadvantage against movements that are playing the long game.

In a recent conversation with Sadia Zaman (CEO, Inspirit Foundation), Vu Le (author of Reimagining Philanthropy and Nonprofits) underscored this point. He noted that while restrictive movements work on multi-decade timelines, progressive funders often stay within 2–3 year cycles.

To meet the moment, funders need to think structurally: supporting ideas and strategies that expand public imagination and shift what is considered possible. 

These ambitious ideas help move the Overton Window and create space for genuine structural change. The question for funders is whether we continue reinforcing short-term constraints or invest in the next 30 years of a more inclusive, democratic Canada.

Narinder
New Power Labs

Like what you’re reading? Subscribe to get weekly Equity Shots in your inbox.