The Sunrise Theory of Change

Public power and Political power are both equally essential in organizing a collective action that leads to results while combating climate change. Sunrise works towards utilizing the two forces simultaneously as complements and making them operate together. Prakash notes that building people power and political power simultaneously is crucial in order to win a massive, government-led transformation of our entire economy and society away from fossil fuels in the next decade. Describing the approach taken by Sunrise as a movement, Prakash states that, “This is Sunrise’s theory of change (build both people power and political power), our hypothesis about what we need to do to win: if we keep building people power and political power, we will win a Green New Deal.”

In this chapter, Prakash focuses partially on describing the power and abilities of a large public movement that is resilient and unwearying. She says that “This idea (focus on the guy in the suit. He’s the one that can make it happen) is so strong in our society that, even in the context of a social movement supposedly dedicated to the “power of the people,” we easily forget about the power of the people to make change happen.” Sunrise has a strategy in place so that young organizers could persevere through the loss of each campaign as the movement progresses. They figured out a method to measure their public power. This is measured by being broken down into two parts: 1) A growing majority of massive support for their cause, 2) A growing base of active support. Prakash believes that “even if the men in suits say no to our demands – as they will many, many times-we might still be on the path to victory, if we’re building enough people power.” According to Prakash, an increase in active public support makes a movement and its causes stronger and more notable. Hence, even if Sunrise’s demands aren’t met, Prakash is confident about going back with more people and more support until Sunrise and the public it represents win. Prakash mentions a study that shows, “no campaigns failed once they’d achieved the active and sustained participation of just 3.5% of the population.” She uses this to support Sunrise’s strategy of vigorously growing its active base to the scale where millions take sustained action for a Green New Deal. Amidst explaining the importance of a mass public action that is sustained, Prakash states that “Broad public support doesn’t guarantee victory, but victory does require broad public support.”

Prakash understands that policies are influenced by public opinion. Politicians favor the opinion of the majority and this is what mass public movements help to achieve. An example Prakash gives for this is the change in Obama’s stance on same-sex marriage rights as polls showed that the majority of Americans backed it. As Prakash states, “We clearly couldn’t assume that Democrats like Obama would join our side after coming into office, so we chose to do what movements in the past had done: build people power and bend the arc of history as fast as possible.” Although Prakash realized earlier that People power and a large active movement would be key to the sunrise strategy, it was only after the youth climate movement around Keystone did, she realize that an organized political power is equally necessary. The Keystone movement, according to Prakash, “had no coordinated strategy to move our people power to the polls in the most consequential election of our lifetimes.” While talking about the process of having bills passed that decarbonize the economy and create millions of jobs, Prakash points out that “No grassroots movement is so powerful that it can succeed legislatively without savvy and committed allies in elected office.” Connecting the powers of both public and political sectors and portraying how they work together: Prakash explains how the terms of climate change debate have transformed drastically over the course of a year. She credits the joint force of public and political power and emphasizes that neither one can work independently, and both have to be fundamental and foundational to Sunrise’s strategies. Commenting on the transformation of climate change debate, Prakash states, “This wouldn’t have been possible without thousands and thousands of young organizers building people power, but it also required a few champions in Congress…who were willing to wield the power of elected office to advance the Green New Deal.”

A central element of Sunrise’s strategies towards political power is the politicians it chooses to support. Prakash talks about this rather candidly and succinctly states that “The first political principle is, We support politicians who will champion the Green New Deal and represent us, not the fossil fuel billionaires. If a candidate isn’t willing to reject money from Big Oil, it tells us a lot about whom they would likely represent.” The second principle Sunrise holds is of “No permanent friends, no permanent enemies.” This is designed to prevent a biased stance and prolonged feeling of hero-worship-or grudge-holding among the activists in relationship to a politician.” The third principle is “We support candidates who represent a significant break with the status quo for their district,” this, according to Prakash, ensures that Sunrise is being inclusive and not working only for the most progressive districts. This principle helps Sunrise build a larger political base, partnering with candidates who are ready to move things in the right-direction.

Sunrise also has compromise and practicality at the core of its movement as a key element. An instance of this is where it supported the democratic nominee, Gretchen Whitmer, in Michigan. Although she wasn’t the star candidate they were hoping for, she was a significant improvement over Rick Snyder.” As Prakash concludes the chapter on Sunrise’s key strategies, she stresses once again how important the joint force of public and political power is to the movement. She states that “After riding shotgun with our movement’s strategy for three-plus years, the thing that strikes me is the relatively harmonious relationship between protest organizing (aimed at building public power) and electoral organizing (aimed at building political power).”