Block Build Bridge

the strategy craze that's sweeping the nation

Thanks again for letting me think through all the things I’ve learned at conferences this summer! Today I wanted to share a little bit about the strategy that a lot of pro-democracy organizers have embraced. Some focus on “Block and Build,” some add “Bridge,” and some also add “Break,” which I think a few of you reading this would really love, although it’s not as common.

Before I get too far into the details, though, let me share why that’s today’s subject: the third plenary session at the 22nd Century Initiative conference in Atlanta in June was on this exact subject. (You may have read previous newsletters I wrote on content from this conference such as civil rights elders’ wisdom for today, on regressive philanthropy, and on shared interest organizing.)

So today I’ll be sharing:

• A few framing pieces from the plenary session;

• What BUILD AND BLOCK and its variants are;

• What I’m reflecting on in my own interpersonal and movement work; and

• a few random strands that came up during the plenary in case you’re interested!

Where there’s hope, as well as a short timeline

During the plenary, Scot Nakagawa shared a basic overview of where he sees us in relationship to rising authoritarianism. If you don’t know Scot’s work, check out

The Anti-Authoritarian Playbook

, his incredible newsletter based on decades of pro-democracy work and research. He’s the main reason I went to the conference in Atlanta—if he’s involved, you know it will be high quality and useful.

Scot noted from his and others’ research that once authoritarians take over institutions, we have about 18 months “til the struggle levels up.” I believe he said this as an advocate for nonviolence who knows that now is the period where nonviolence is still viable as the sole strategy for turning things around.

He also highlighted the advantages we have—the sources of encouragement. I should note that all of these are messy, but since his audience was largely folks on the left, it was a good reminder not to ignore these things just because they feel inadequate or even not radical enough:

• The media is better this time around about reporting what’s actually going on. As an example, I read a mainstream media article yesterday talking about RFK Jr’s slashing of funding for mRNA research, and it repeatedly emphasized that his explanations of why went directly in the face of overwhelming scientific research and evidence. I would add that this is probably enhanced by what my friend and brilliant digital media consultant Pakou Her refers to as “narrowcasting.” We have many more independent news sources including actual solid reporting resources among the social media influencer world who are telling more complete stories, creating pressure for other media to do the same. (BTW, I was trying to find a post from early this year where Pakou listed a number of those sources but can’t find it—if you know of good “narrowcasters” on the socials, include them in the comments!)

• While the Supreme Court and some of the more notorious district courts are supporting anti-democracy and anti-rights cases, other members of the judiciary (including Reagan and Bush and Trump appointees) are resisting the abuse of constitutional rights for people in this country.

• We are witnessing a vibrant civil society. This conference happened not long after the No Kings march, and Nakagawa noted that almost two percent of the US population was in the streets for those rallies. Noted civil resistance scholar Erica Chenoweth’s research has shown that historically, nonviolent movements can sustain themselves long enough to succeed with as few as 3.5% of the population engaged in it. That doesn’t necessarily guarantee success, but it’s considered a necessary component, so that’s good news. I will note, some of the organizers at this conference had mixed feelings about No Kings because so many participants were seeking to reclaim the US flag as a symbol of liberal values, whereas a number of minorities find it to be an irredeemable symbol of hate and violence. But a big part of the point of this conference (and this keynote) was that we have an opportunity to broaden the base, and that means meeting people where they are and through relationship helping them move to a better place, a place of a more radical and inclusive vision. More on that later, as well as in future newsletters.¹

Nakagawa noted that “purpose-driven coalitions” are critical right now. The phrase he used that I loved the most was “We need to build a bigger We.” (That was actually the name of the plenary session.) This is why he used the language of “Block, Build, and BRIDGE” as a strategy to prevent authoritarian consolidation.

Image by Leo from Pixabay

What is Block and Build (and sometimes Bridge) (and occasionally Break)?

Max Elbaum wrote an article for Common Dreams in 2023. It includes two really salient and interconnected points. The first is:

“Trump’s 2016 victory was the product of 50 years of organizing driven by two of the most deeply rooted forces in U.S. society: a wing of the capitalist class rooted in the fossil fuel industry and libertarian billionaires like the Koch brothers, and the layers of people of many classes who are wedded to ordering society with clear racial and gender hierarchies.”

His concluding statement was,

We need to defeat MAGA candidates up and down the line and protect the result. If we do so while building the independent strength of grassroots progressive groups and functioning as the most resolute opponents of MAGA on every battlefront, we can move the country toward a robust multiracial, gender-inclusive democracy and deep structural change.

Convergence Magazine has phenomenal content on this dual strategy of BLOCKing the MAGA agenda while BUILDing a strong coalition of pro-democracy, pro-inclusion, pro-economic justice groups to work toward our overwhelmingly shared values. In particular you might find their curriculum useful (especially if you’ve been getting together with like-hearted friends and want something to work through!)

I hate to admit that because I’m so into those Four R’s (Reform, Resist, Reconstruct, and Reimagine) that I wrote about last month that I have spent almost a year thinking I knew what Block and Build is, while being wrong about Build. I thought Build was like Reconstruct, casting a concrete vision and implementation plan for positive change. This is why I thought the word Bridge was a helpful addition. As the 22nd Century Initiative puts it in their “Block, Bridge, Build” content summary (a great resource for organizations refining their organizing strategy):

We will block the rise of toxic polarization and political violence, bridge to the constituencies we need to organize supermajorities, and build toward governing power in an inclusive, multi-racial, pluralistic democracy.

Julia Roig wrote a helpful article on the distinct roles of block, build, and bridge in Nonprofit Quarterly. She points out that sometimes the strategies of Block and Build seem to be in tension with each other, while when we function out of “both/and” thinking, they actually strengthen each other. She also ties in the wisdom of john a. powell and the Othering and Belonging Institute regarding the Bridge element. It is worth a read! And the podcast by Othering and Belonging on “How We Can Block, Build, and Bridge Our Democratic Future Together” is worth a listen!

I’ve only recently bumped into “Break” as the fourth B. In a blog post by David Comfort of the recently formed grassroots protest organization Democracy Action Network, he describes Break as “A civil resistance tactic involving strategic nonviolent action to disrupt complacency and raise awareness of key issues.” Interestingly enough, he cites Julia Roig, who referenced it as a concept during a panel by the Institute for Othering and Belonging. So—small world syndrome at work, I guess.

You can probably tell from my many links and citations that I am an advocate for this model, and it aligns with my own learnings from my history in organizing, but I don’t necessarily consider myself a subject expert. So even if this is all new to you, it’s still an emerging and evolving paradigm for most organizers and activists, and for me too!

What this means for me (and maybe you?)

Ash-Lee Woodard Henderson, who has facilitated great workshops for the Working Families Party on the Block and Build strategy, was also on this panel. She said something I found SO helpful, although not universally useful. She (possibly like you and definitely like me) has run into a lot of people who are really resistant to the frequency with which many of us are using the term “authoritarianism” for what’s happening right now. In a few weeks, I’ll have a whole newsletter on a phenomenal academic presentation I attended laying out why this doesn’t feel like authoritarianism to some people but how by most scholarly measures, it is. But for now, I’ll just share Ash-Lee’s wisdom: “I’m not fighting about whether ‘authoritarianism’ is here. I’m focusing on examples: ‘do you like this thing that’s happening? [ICE roundups, privatizing crisis weather information, putting people in truly inhumane conditions in Florida or El Salvador without due process, etc.]’. People don’t defect unless there’s something to defect to.”

I definitely heard a couple of seasoned organizers asking each other why we need to add “Bridge” when “Build” was already about building cooperation among groups of people not used to cooperating—in other words, bridging. And that makes a lot of sense. During this plenary, I think Scot and Ash-Lee both leaned into bringing in people as well as groups who are still on a learning journey, while not abandoning our principles in the process. Ash-Lee in that quote was saying we needed to find language that didn’t shut people down, but to keep talking about what matters. To me, that requires knowing our principles well enough not to get pulled off track by an agenda imposed on us by the Right.

An example of that came up at another point in the plenary, when someone quoted Raquel Welch as saying that the hyperfocus on trans people is a project to distract from the 1% of billionaires. (More on that in another newsletter.) We’ve all watched months of Democratic pundits blaming the Left for the electoral defeat, and an example that came up over and over was that instead of talking about economic injustices we kept focusing on trans rights. There are a lot of things going on there that we might want to address. But remembering that the left mostly just wants trans people to be left alone to live their/our lives and also cares about economic justice, while the right is (to borrow a phrase I’ll talk more about another time) “obsessing over the wrong 1%,” can help us have a more useful conversation with folks who have had the false narrative imposed on them so much they’ve taken it as real. A lot of the internal fights we have among progressives can actually be traced back to narratives created about us by the Right, which we have unconsciously adopted. A key element of Bridging, as I see it, is being clear on what matters and (to borrow from the shared interest organizing newsletter from two weeks ago) being clear on what that has to do with the person you’re talking to.

A few other details from the plenary

Ash-Lee mentioned an organization she really values that may be useful to you: Progressive Safety Alliance. If you’re trying to figure out community safety in this time, or if you want resources for your office or organization or club or faith community to become bettered versed in knowing their rights in the face of police or ICE confrontations, they’re a great resource. They also do political education.

She also mentioned Ejeris Dixon and the Fascism Barometer podcast, which might be right up your alley as you seek to stay informed.

And one of the panelists (my notes don’t say who) shared that there are 23 states with MAGA control of governor plus both houses (including Nebraska, which is actually unicameral apparently), and progressive organizers in those states need our support, since it’s where right-wing strategies are test-driven before making their way to a Supreme Court that is similarly inclined. I’m thinking about how I can better support people doing powerful grassroots work in those places. The whole 22nd Century Initiative conference reminded me of how much good work is happening in places that some progressives have written off, including much of the South.

Well, that’s what I have for this week. I hope you found it helpful! It was great to revisit this content as I figure out what my particular role in this moment of the movement is. I am grateful to be in this work with you.

peace,
Sandhya

PS—I’m thrilled any time people find my work helpful and share it with others. Please always feel free to do so.

1. While you might be tired of me bringing up Anand Giridharadas’s book The Persuaders, this is basically the first chapter of that book, which shared Linda Sarsour’s experiences with the Women’s March, as a leftist organizer who worked mostly with low-income immigrants and people of color, organizing a national event with middle class white women who simply had little frame of reference for the people the most impacted by the incoming administration’s agenda in 2017.