Tip 8: Working with other groups

Allies are indispensable to the climate movement. In addition to individuals as allies, allies can come in small informal groups, medium-sized numbers, or huge numbers-–neighborhood, religious, environmental, student, health, women’s, aged, peace, union, or teenage. These groups start out around a few well-minded individuals and sometimes grow successfully, like 350.org or Fridays for Future, and then hit a threshold, less prone to work with other or smaller groups. In contrast, advantaged by pooling resources or growing strength in numbers, many groups, notably the smaller ones, realize they have to link up with others. But suddenly there comes another sequence of challenges in working with another group: in what way? how much? which tactics and positions? and when? We are forced to make choices, often with healthy outcomes, but sometimes, under an inexperience, naivete, or a cunning of the possible ally that is dangerous, unsure, competitive or duplicitous.  So let us go through some tips. Do avoid some of these debilitating, time consuming, costly detours, realizing full well that ending climate change requires a massive, global grassroots engagement for renewables, thus far not seen in human history.

Assess where we are today. The climate change movement is still in its organizational infancy, with much to be learned and much to be overcome. We are figuring out how to grow those grassroots. Even though social media and other technologies have made it so much easier to make an initial connection, a monumental organizing task faces us: literally millions must come together to push for reversing climate change, as they ward off the fossil fuel strategy of delaying renewables until we die. A movement with lots of different cultures, social layers, and welfare positions can be challenging. In working for climate justice, climate deniers are currently on an aggressive rampage to undermine notions of climate change. Hundreds of billions remain hindered in unactionable doubt despite an undeterred record accelerating global emission. It is imperative that we grow the global grassroots movement.

Do not underestimate the opposition’s cunning, namely the coal, gas and oil complex and its web of power in social media, AI, leadership, its army of lobbyists, and its tentacles into the military industrial complex. This fossil fuel greedy complex will divide, delay, distort, divert. Somehow many more “d’s” seem relevant from damage, diminish, and destroy the climate movement. For example LNG, really methane, is neither liquid nor natural. It is indeed dangerous, but suggesting focus on it, as some climate activists urge, diverts our attention from CO2, which LNG will, in part, break down into. So we start fighting about which fossil fuel is bad, and not why we must urgently go to renewables, and away from all fossil fuels.

Make sure from the outset that the allies you seek, tiny or large, are aligned in a mission or vision or common values which are articulated. In that alignment, the other group offers something concrete that you lack, such as local support from the rest of the neighborhood, or experience, ties, or data knowledge, respect, etc.

Select a concrete means or ways of cooperating with allies such as a talk, a demonstration, an article for the local newspaper, a shared table, a local meeting. Co-sponsorship is one way in which two or more groups facilitate ways to cooperate to advance a common goal, focussed on reducing, over time, distrust, suspicion, fear, or at least getting a sense of whether the groups can cooperate, the very thing fossil fuel complexes seek to engender. Seek out ways which help both groups, that give both an advantage: the win-win. Sometimes, this could amount to a verbal/actionable agreement for both groups. Around a speakers event, this could mean that both groups promote an event, inviting their individual email lists, both sharing logos in their promotion, both having a petition at the event, both sharing data such as a signup at the event; one group moderates, the other group presents the speaker and the groups; both share in financial responsibilities. In more organized, structured groups, this could mean working out a written agreement to clarify such a cooperative cosponsorship. Eventually this cooperation could even turn into nominal co-sponsorship where group A represents group B at meeting one, group B represents group A at meeting 2. To solidify common values of the groups or allies, reducing distrust, distance, fear, discomfort with each other becomes the purpose, as in the story of self (Tip 2).

Be fair in cooperation. It is better to pursue steady fairness than to stoop down to unfair or disrespectful practices. For example, in deciding to share signups to an event under mutual co-sponsorship, be the first, as agreed, to supply those names and information to the second group. If you show unfair behaviour, you invite the other group to behave the same way. But if the other group behaves unfairly, your group can seek to discuss and seek out fair and honest resolution. Often after one or two events, it becomes clear whether fairness is a living word or a false cover.

Avoid at the start monetary entanglements. If there is anything in co-sponsorship that pulls you down, it is financial commitments of one to the other, which sooner or later, are not lived up to. Avoid them initially like poison.

If a larger group resists cooperation, work for fair co-sponsorship with a subgroup. Feeling very self-important, such regional or national groups might have little desire to work with local or smaller groups. Their rule of thumb is often to not work with the little group as equals, subtly driven by the fossil fuel complex's effort to divide and mislead. In that case, seek to work together only with the local group, reminding the upper leadership of your group’s desire.

Avoid organizational egoism. This self-interest as the motive for action is often such an unarticulated, strong goal, it undermines the foundation of co-sponsorship. It is dog eat dog under a thin blanket of cooperation. This can lead to each group seeking to win over the other. In another form of organisational egoism, some groups assert their organisation is so good, they should run the show, with no need for true co-sponsorship. “We will show up at the park at 3 PM, we do not need an agreement.” Behind this can lurk some mysterious sense of displaying superiority to broaden support for their cause.

Expose this egoism by repeatedly inviting members of the possible ally to cooperate. Point out that the other group leadership does not want to work with you. Or if need be, have one or two people openly join the opposing group and patiently attend local meetings, volunteer for projects where one can agree, openly emphasizing there is mutual strength in cooperation. You might even note that you, as a member of both groups, welcome not division, but cooperation in co-sponsorship.

Avoid poaching. Ethics requires it to be clear that neither group openly recruits truly active people from the other group. But if inactive, under agreement, passive members of the one group might become active with the other group, in a climate gain. Unfortunately, some groups have declared this intent, only to not live up to it. In some cases, groups want to post on your social media site, but not allow you to post on their site and want to cooperate only to recruit your membership.

Be open to evaluating tactical differences with allies, some of which are acceptable, some not. Do question the contention “we share the same goal” while tactics are strongly different. Tactical differences do make a huge difference. Violent tactics, namecalling tactics, disruptive social tactics, destroying private property, petty theft, supporting one warring faction against another, endorsing small or big reforms–all do make a difference. Sometimes tactical differences have proved stronger than principle differences.

Seek out a more detailed agreement for a co-sponsored event as the collaboration grows and each organized group gains. In this case, the cooperation takes on a more structured agreement, such as a proposed budget, a selection of a treasurer or financial official, prompt as opposed to drawn out accounting, a summary report of actual vs. budgeted revenues and expenses, a clarification of royalties, a clarification of number of papers each group may put on display, a clarification of who is allowed to issue statements, a clarification of registrations, a clarification of what might be avoided, a clarification that all members register at the same rate, etc. Of course, overdoing it undermines clarity.

Be open and discuss looking back on history, noting, as shown in prior tips, major changes are made by people coming together and how the opposition sought to foment internal splits. How did movements instead become sustained grassroots movements, while others remained small sects, increasingly alienated from or looking down on ordinary people? Some groups ignore past mistakes thinking they can still use the same organizing mousetrap, hence classes and class oppression extend now to climate oppression. But if climate change is an existential threat, are class or class differences also an existential threat which skirts over common shared interests and values, namely human life or living things? History is replete with movements that brought groups together only to falter because their desires for parochial power received oppositional support, and were less interested in the interests of the broad masses of ordinary people.

In short, citizens of the world, unite as eternal allies—you have nothing to lose but your existence.