Building Effective Democratic Coalitions

A Strategic Guide

Introduction

In our current political moment, many democratic movements face a common challenge: how to build coalitions broad enough to counter authoritarianism while maintaining a clear vision of the democratic future we seek. This guide offers a strategic framework for understanding the different types of coalitions needed and how to communicate effectively with diverse audiences.

Coalitions and the Stories We Tell About Them

A coalition is an alliance between multiple groups that combine their action toward a common goal. Coalition member groups do not need to have the same perspectives on everything or the same priorities, but they do agree to cooperate for a specific purpose.

Some coalitions form quickly around an issue or a crisis in order to support short-term campaigns to win immediate solutions. Others form and grow more slowly and with longer term commitments. All effective coalitions have clear agreements about leadership, structure, and decision-making, as well as the flexibility to change direction as strategically needed. No matter the context, the timeframe, or the structure, coalitions are always about leveraging collective resources toward a common purpose.

The structure of the coalitions we build are extremely important, but of equal importance are the stories we tell about coalitions and coalition building. These stories are soft entry points into coalitions that point to who belongs, whose voices and actions matter, what we are united against, and what we are aligned for. So before diving into coalition building against authoritarianism and for democracy, let’s start with a brief word about the difference between narrative strategy and strategic communications.

Understanding the Difference: Narrative Strategy vs. Communication Strategy

Narrative Strategy is about the broader story we tell about what we're fighting for and against that is based in our shared systemic understanding of reality and possibility. An effective narrative strategy is rooted in common experiences that shape our understanding of our world, and must appeal to a wide audience with diverse ideological perspectives.

Communication Strategy refers to how we mobilize and energize our core supporters. This often involves more explicit value statements and specific language that resonate with our base. Communication strategies also position ourselves vis a vis the audiences that must be persuaded to join our cause or neutralized as opponents, and the institutions and individuals who must be moved in order to win meaningful solutions.

Narrative strategies are the overarching frameworks through which we make meaning. The themes and stories that constitute the narrative must be portable across the issues we are advancing to win on specific issues.

And example of this that we can draw upon is the makers versus takers narrative that has been popularized by authoritarians. In this framework, society is made up of productive makers, cast as the in-group that leaders are attempting to move to action, and destructive takers, who are the out-group that helps to justify the actions. The takers include immigrants, welfare recipients, the elderly poor, people with disabilities, unions, and lgbtq people (who they claim are recruiting children to their cause through “grooming” and undermining the traditional family, and stealing our nation’s cultural posterity). The makers are those groups suffering from status anxiety as cultural shifts such as demographic change, driven primarily by immigration, and economic shifts resulting from deindustrialization and globalization, threaten their positions among normalized authoritarian hierarchies: the patriarchal father/provider in the traditional family, white people in the context of structural racism, etc.

Many stories are told about undeserving “takers” and these stories are made sense of as a whole within the makers versus takers narrative framework. The narrative strategist Liz Manne describes it this way: stories are like stars, while narratives are like constellations.

A common mistake that progressive organizations often make is using base building organizing language as our public-facing message. Every in-group message has multiple meanings within the complex array of identities and experiences that inform our values and priorities. Broadcasting base building communications can alienate potential allies who might support democratic principles but aren't ready for the full progressive vision. Worse, it can clarify and mobilize opposition among those who might otherwise support the specific solutions we are seeking.

Two Essential Coalition Types

When considering broad based coalition building, we often imagine a single coalition. However, we need to build the broadest coalition possible; one that crosses ideological boundaries, identities, group-specific interests, and geography. This goal may best be achieved by forming a coalition of coalitions made up of united front groupings that feed into multiple, interlocking coalitions across the widest array of interests possible.

The following is a list of definitions:

1. The United Front (Core Leadership)

Definition: Groups closely aligned on deeper values and vision who develop strategy and maintain movement direction, while also providing members with relative safety, emotional respite, and opportunities to strategize with those with whom we are most closely aligned in terms of interests and ideology.

Characteristics:

• Shares fundamental values and analysis

• Develops long-term strategy

• Maintains the movement's vision

• Uses more specific, values-based language

• Often employs polarizing communications to identify and organize core leadership

Purpose: To build a strong, aligned leadership core that can guide the movement with clarity and conviction.

2. The Popular Front (Broad Coalition)

Definition: A broad and diverse alliance in terms of ideology, key constituencies, class, and identity united around basic democratic principles and opposition to authoritarianism.

Characteristics:

• Includes groups with different ideological perspectives and walks of life

• Diversity by class and identity

• Unites around foundational democratic principles

• Has a lower bar for participation

• Uses broad, inclusive language

• Appeals to a potential supermajority of society

Purpose: To create political space where democratic debate can happen and to serve as a bulwark against authoritarian forces.

Strategic Implications

We need an overarching strategy in order to create the biggest “we” possible, while allowing groups within the “we” to retain their integrity and serve group specific needs around recruitment, engagement, and retention. This makes balancing united front and popular front strategies and tactics, while building pipelines to mass mobilizers that consolidate and exercise power at strategic intervention points.

1. Create Appropriate Spaces: Develop distinct spaces for united front discussions (where values alignment is important) and popular front organizing (where the focus is on basic democratic principles).
   
   

2. Establish Minimal Conditions: For the popular front, focus on the minimal democratic conditions that diverse groups can agree upon.
   
   

Understand Coalition Purposes: Recognize that the popular front isn't just a means to implement a pre-determined vision, but rather creates the civic space where democratic debate about that vision can happen.

Use Context-Appropriate Language: Be mindful of which audience you're addressing and tailor your language accordingly.

Practical Applications

For Internal Organizing (United Front):

• Use values-based language that energizes your core supporters

• Be explicit about long-term vision

• Develop deep analysis and strategy

• Build strong relationships among aligned organizations

For Public Coalition Building (Popular Front):

• Frame issues around broadly shared principles

• Use language that invites participation from across the political spectrum

• Focus on defending democratic institutions and processes

• Emphasize what unites the coalition rather than what divides it

Conclusion

Effective resistance to authoritarianism requires both types of coalitions working in concert. By understanding the difference between united front and popular front strategies, activists can build more effective movements that both maintain vision and broaden appeal. The popular front creates the political space necessary for democratic debate, while the united front maintains the vision and direction of the movement.

Remember: The space for debate about what democracy should be comes from first establishing a broad coalition committed to protecting the democratic process itself.