Conference Report on "Solidarity in Times of Crisis"

Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, 2021

for valuable comments on an earlier draft. 1 https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/aug/31/shepparton-couple-donating-up-to-500-free-meals-a-day-amid-covid-outbreak. 2 Kathryn Liban and Prakash Kashwan, 'Solidarity in Times of Crisis', Journal of Human Rights 19 (2020): 542. 3 'Solidarity in a Time of Crisis: The Role of Mutual Aid and the Covid-19 Pandemic ', Yunus Centre Report, February 2021. 4 For a discussion of the so-called 'disintegration thesis', i.e., see H.L.A. Hart, 'Social Solidarity and the Enforcement of Morality', The University of Chicago Law Review 35 (1987). 5 Solidarity has, as Crowe nicely puts it, a 'mercurial' quality. It is an 'unstable phenomenon that oscillates between periods of relative quiescence and of intense expressions during events such as strikes, revolutions and religious ceremonies', as well as-we may add-crises such as the current pandemic. See Graham Crow, 'Social Solidarities', Sociology Compass 4 (2010): 58.

"Solidarity: Theory and Practice" (Lexington Books, 2014) brings together philosophers, social psychologists, and social scientists to approach contemporary social reality from the viewpoint of solidarity. The contributors examine the nature of different kinds of solidarity and assess the normative and explanatory potential of the concept. They study various aspects of solidarity as a unique emotionally and ethically responsive relation: the nature of collective emotions and mutual recognition, responsiveness to others’ suffering and needs, and the nature of moral partiality included in solidarity. The evolution of norms of solidarity is examined both via the natural evolution of the human “social brain” and via the institutional changes in legal constitutions and contemporary work life. This book will appeal to students and scholars working in these fields and to anyone interested in the interdisciplinary topic of social solidarity.

2025

Plea, defence, utopia-solidarity has become a buzz word. New technologies and the associated national and global networking through data, the challenge of political upheavals that affect social coexistence, the world of labor, access to education as well as family and identity politics, repeatedly raise the question of changing solidarity practices. They make it necessary to fill and define the concept of solidarity anew. The background to this anthology is therefore the question of solidarity practices in an increasingly digitalized, globally connected world that is repeatedly challenged by multiple crises. New connections as well as disruptions are emerging, particularly in the context of social networks, which include not only, but also, spaces within the digital sphere. The call for more solidarity has very different consequences, depending on the context. It quickly becomes clear that what is meant by solidarity and what consequences accompany the call for solidarity is by no means an undisputed universal. The different definitions in terms of extensionality, intensity, framework conditions, forms, goals and duration make it clear that solidarity is a broad field whose ambiguity sometimes carries the risk of instrumentalization (see Dabrock: 2022; and the contribution by Megan Arndt in this volume). Nevertheless, the concept of solidarity is a 'Sehnsuchtswort' (cf. Högg/Rung: 2019), a 'word of longing'. The term continues to be addressed anew, time and time again, particularly in the current German and European political debates on democracy and its foundations (cf. Lesch: 2019), which is increasingly under threat amid the questioning of the social constituent. Nationalist and radical right-wing parties are increasingly gaining ground in Europe and around the world. Their agendas consist of narrowing group affiliations. In the face of this challenge to democracy, work on the concept of solidarity is far from over. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has also played a formative role in the global debate on the concept of solidarity in recent years. It has once again shown the interconnectedness of human actions and bodies in a globalized world as well as their disruptions. The calls for solidarity in times of the pandemic showed that these calls had very different consequences. Often the concept of solidarity was understood asymmetrically in this context. It was linked to the question of 'who is (most) vulnerable?' when it came to determining whom solidarity is applied to.

2019

The international workshop Understanding Solidarity – New Challenges, New Approaches was organised by Andreas Busen (Universität Hamburg) and Stefan Wallaschek (BIGSSS, Universität Bremen) and took place in Hamburg from the 25 to the 27 of January 2019. The main goals of the workshop were to provide a forum for discussing innovative ideas and to facilitate the dialogue between experts in the field of solidarity working in different academic disciplines. This is a report with the intent to document, summarise, and constitute accessible to a larger audience the ideas, arguments and theses presented in the framework of the workshop. The goal of engaging in an evaluative commentary process is only, if at all, minimally served.

Public Health Ethics, 2012

Filozofija i Društvo, 2017

This review essay takes a critical look at two recently published edited volumes, both focusing on the notion and problems of solidarity. Solidarity: Theory and Practice (Laitinen and Pessi, eds.) attempts to unpack the complex idea of solidaristic practice by looking at a whole range of related concepts, such as the social brain, collective intentionality, empathy, work, and voluntary organizations. The Strains of Commitment: The Political Sources of Solidarity in Diverse Societies (Banting and Kymlicka, eds.), on the other hand, focuses on a concrete problem: the generation and maintenance of redistributive solidarity within societies marked by diversity. Still, both volumes take a thorough and systematic look at existing scholarship on solidarity, and by encompassing both the theoretical and the empirical, mark a significant step forward in deepening our understanding of the role and place of solidarity in general social theory.

Journal for Peace and Justice Studies, 2008

(GSP) between the Dioceses of St. Cloud and Homa Bay, Kenya. With the help of Catholic Relief Services (CRS), the diocesan partnership has been functioning since 1999. One of the unique characteristics of the partnership is the involvement of the College of St. Benedict/St. John's University (CSB/SJU), a Benedictine institution that is the only Catholic college in the diocese. i In this essay we will discuss the structure and activities of the partnership at the diocesan level, and then look specifically at the participation of CSB/SJU, one of the diocesan constituent groups in the partnership. We will also look at some of the factors that are important for a strong Global Solidarity Partnership. Our goal is not only to give an analytical account but to present findings that may be of use to those considering or already involved in such partnerships. While we make use of some documents in the writing of this essay, much of the information comes from participant observation by the authors, each of whom have been actively involved in the partnership for a number of years. ii Mutuality: A Key Global Solidarity Principle Global Solidarity in Catholic Social Teaching is discussed in depth elsewhere in this volume. In this section we will focus briefly on mutuality, a key principle for Global Solidarity Partnerships that underlies the structures and practices of the St. Cloud-Homa Bay partnership. The importance of mutuality, and the efforts to practice it, will be seen in the case study below. In their report on their 2005 conference on Global Solidarity Partnerships, CRS (2005, p. 8) wrote: [Mutuality] means that each partner affects the other. Mutuality can take the form of face-to-face interaction that includes caring, loving, cooperation , empathy, respect, and communication. It is most directly manifest through the sharing of gifts. This requires valuing the gifts each brings to the partnership. The CRS report then goes on to make an important observation: We have become accustomed to seeing the world through the divisions of rich and poor; the 'haves' and the 'have nots.' Mutuality is unthinkable as long as the world remains divided by labels and distinctions.... We must be able to recognize our strengths and places where we are wounded or lacking. We must also recognize other forms of riches and the strengths of others around us.... Give +Take = Mutuality." The view of the world as being composed of "haves" and "have nots," as the "gifted Global North" and the "needy Global South," can prevent the development of true mutuality and solidarity. According to Pakisa Tshmika and Tim Lind, this view divides us in two and creates deep-rooted complexes of superiority and inferiority. It makes some of us feel that we don't need others at all, and it makes others of us feel that we can do nothing without the initiative of others. It causes some of us to think we have no gifts worthy of sharing. It gives great honor to certain gifts, such as material wealth and power and particular professions, while dishonoring and cheapening gifts such as hospitality, certain less lofty skills, and reliance on others (Tshmika and Lind, 2003, p. 20).

Religions

Towards the end of the 20th century, the word “solidarity” became one of the most important and famous words, not only in the sphere of Euro–Atlantic civilization but the word was also readily used in political milieus. In the religious sphere, and especially in the Judeo–Christian tradition, the anthropological, ethical as well as biblical sense of this important concept was emphasized. This sense was recalled in the postulate: Bear one another’s burdens. Never one against the other, but always one and the other, one together with the other. In this day and age, solidarity as a source of inter-human hope poses a real challenge and task for us because we are experiencing such great migrations of people who—for a variety of reasons, frequently very painful ones, and among them the devastating ravages of war—leave behind their places of residence and go into exile. In my study, I will try to show how, in the contemporary world of philosophy and socio-political changes, a modern sense ...

The paper provides an analysis of the relationship between the concepts of justice and solidarity. The point of departure of the analysis is Ruud ter Meulen’s claim that these concepts are different but mutually complementary, i.e. they are two sides of the same coin. In the paper two alternative accounts of the relationship are proposed. According to the first one, solidarity can be defined in terms of justice, i.e. as a special variety of liberal justice, viz. social liberal justice, which, apart from the value of liberty, also stresses the importance of the value of equality. An example of such a theory is Rawls’ theory of justice, within which the value of equality is ‘encoded’ in the principle of fair equality of opportunity and in the difference principle. According to the second account, solidarity is an expression of a special type of social relationships – the so-called ‘thick relationships’, which (as opposed to ‘thin relationships’) are non-superficial, positive, their para-digmatic examples being family and friendship; in other words, the rules of solidarity are rules that are built into ‘thick relationships’. On the first account, justice and solidarity are not different, while on the second account they are different but mutually exclusive rather than mutually com-plementary. In the last part of the paper some remarks on the social causes of solidarity are made.

Amerikastudien/American Studies, 2022