Solidarity orsolidarism is an awareness of shared interests, objectives, standards, and sympathies creating a psychological sense of unity of groups or classes.[1][2] True solidarity means moving beyond individual identities and single issue politics.[3] Still, solidarity does not rejectindividuals and sees individuals as the basis ofsociety.[4] It refers to theties in a society that bind people together as one. The term is generally employed insociology and the othersocial sciences, as well as inphilosophy andbioethics.[5] It is a significant concept inCatholic social teaching and inChristian democratic political ideology.[6] Although closely related to the concept ofcharity, solidarity aspires to change whole systems, not merely to help individuals.[7][8]
Solidarity is also one of six principles of theCharter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,[9] andInternational Human Solidarity Day is recognized each year on December 20 as aninternational observance. Solidarity is not mentioned in theEuropean Convention on Human Rights nor in the United Nations'Universal Declaration of Human Rights and therefore has lesser legal meaning when compared to basic rights.
Concepts of solidarity are mentioned in the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights,[10] but not defined clearly.[11]
The termssolidaire andsolidairement had already appeared in French legal language in the 16th century. They are related to the Roman legal concept in solidum, which was derived from theLatin word solidus, meaning "on behalf of the whole". In theNapoleonic code, solidarity meant the joint liability of debtors towards a common creditor and was not a primary legal principle.[12]
Conservatism, following theFrench Revolution, introduced the concept of "solidarity", which was detached from thelegal system, as areaction against rapidsocial change and as a longing for a stable society. During theJuly Monarchy,Pierre Leroux, autopian socialist who is also said to have coined the termsocialism, also introduced the concept of non-legal solidarity.[12]Auguste Comte, the so-called founder ofsociology, adopted the concept in the sense of social interdependence between people. Comte linked solidarity to the concept ofaltruism as the opposite ofegoism. Instead of emphasising theindividual, altruism emphasises common responsibility and solidarity. The interpretations of Pierre Leroux and Auguste Comte gave rise to the idea of a specific social solidarity as the basis of thesocial order.[13]
After theFrench Revolution, new scientific and ideological interpretations of solidarity emerged in France. The concept took on sociological, economic, legal, and political variants. Thinkers with different emphases shaped the meaning of the concept of solidarity to suit their own purposes.
TheParis Communards, for example, exchanged the revolutionary slogan of "fraternity" for "solidarity". Some Frenchliberal economists also began to use the term "solidarity", but they changed its meaning in an individualistic direction.Liberalists argued that interdependence between people meant that people also had to take responsibility for their actions without the state intervening.[12]Charles Gide, an economist who opposed liberalism, developed his own interpretation of the concept and even proposed solidarity as the name of a new school of economics.[13]
Through these stages, by the turn of the 20th century, solidarity had become a generic term that could be associated with almost everything that was considered good andprogressive. TheParis World Fair in 1900 was accompanied by a congress on "social education and the new solidarity". TheCatholic Church also began to use the popular concept of solidarity. According to sociologistSteven Lukes, solidarity played a role in France at the time that was almost as strong and influential as individualism was in theUnited States at the same time.[12]
According toÉmile Durkheim, the types of social solidarity correlate withtypes of society. Durkheim introduced the termsmechanical andorganic solidarity[14] as part of his theory of the development of societies inThe Division of Labour in Society (1893). In a society exhibiting mechanical solidarity, its cohesion and integration comes from the homogeneity of individuals—people feel connected through similar work, educational and religious training, and lifestyle. Mechanical solidarity normally operates in traditional small-scale societies.[15] Intribal society, solidarity is usually based onkinship ties of familial networks. Organic solidarity comes from the interdependence that arises from specialization of work and the complementarities between people—a development which occurs in modern and industrial societies.[15]
Although individuals perform different tasks and often have different values and interests, the order and solidarity of society depends on their reliance on each other to perform their specified tasks. "Organic" refers to the interdependence of the component parts, and thus social solidarity is maintained in more complex societies through the interdependence of its component parts (e.g., farmers produce the food to feed the factory workers who produce the tractors that allow the farmer to produce the food).
Although the concept of solidarity had already been used in thelabor movement in the mid-19th century, it was only the liberal republicans who brought solidarity into the mainstream of French political debate. In 1896,Léon Bourgeois published his bookSolidarité, which introduced the concept of solidarity into political language. Bourgeois's solidarity was based primarily on the interdependence between people, a double-edged sword that produced both security and threats. However, it was also based on the idea of social debt. According to Bourgeois, man owes society the technical andintellectual capital thatsocial development has produced for him.[12][13]
Bourgeois also introduced the term solidarism to describe apolitical ideology based on solidarity. Solidarism was a precise and clear structure of ideas whichradicalism was also able to assimilate, and it came to regard it as its own ideological expression. After the turn of the century, Bourgeois solidarism came to be regarded almost as an official idea of theThird Republic. His solidarism combined elements ofDurkheim's theory of solidarity with the theories ofLouis Pasteur andCharles Darwin, and constituted an alternative to the confrontation betweenclassical liberalism and workerscollectivism. Bourgeois emphasised the solidarity generated by interdependence between people as a positive factor for allhuman growth. Solidarism thus combined the natural interdependence of human beings with solidarity as a moral goal. Although the idea of solidarity had different successors and interpretations, they had in common the emphasis on both thesocial responsibility of the state and thecooperation of citizens.[12][13]
Solidarity also played a central role in the thinking of the French economistCharles Gide (1847–1932). Gide set out to challenge the dominance of the liberalschool of economics in France. His thinking was influenced by bothbiology andsociology. He was particularly influenced byCharles Fourier, who had criticised thesocial ills created byfree market competition. Solidarity became a fundamental concept in Gide's thinking. He found manifestations of solidarity in nature, in the economy and in the social interdependencies of society, but for him solidarity was only ethically valuable when it was consciously voluntary. He created his own national economic doctrine, called Solidarism, according to which society could gradually move towards acooperative economy in which workers themselves controlled themeans of production. In Gide's thinking, the values and goals of solidarity could be pursued through cooperative associations, 'the voluntary association of well-meaning people'.[16]
In Gide's solidarity, thecommon property created by free cooperative associations is their own and the added value created by their activities is returned in the form ofprofit sharing. Solidarism preserved the foundations of the free market economic system and also accepted differences in people's economic status. However, large income disparities were not in line with the idea of solidarity, as Gide considered them to break the ties that bind theindividual tosociety.[16] Gide is considered a major representative of theFrench historical school, and his ideas were different from the mainstreamliberal economics of the time. Gide'ssocial philosophy was close to that ofLéon Walras, the developer ofneoclassicalgeneral equilibrium theory, and he was one of the few supporters of Walras during his lifetime.[17]
Solidarity is still the core value underlying cooperatives today, alongside self-reliance,ownership,equality, andjustice.Cooperative members have a duty to emphasise the common interest and to ensure that all members are treated as fairly as possible. In addition to solidarity with its own members, the cooperative now also emphasisessocial responsibility beyond the cooperative itself.
Anarchist theoristPeter Kropotkin (1842–1921) connected the biological and the social in his formulation of solidarity. In his book,Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution (1902), written partly in response to Huxleyan Social Darwinism, Kropotkin studied the use of cooperation as a survival mechanism in human societies at their various stages, as well as with animals. According to him,mutual aid, or cooperation, within a species has been an important factor in the evolution of social institutions. Solidarity is essential for mutual aid; supportive activity towards other people does not result from the expectation of reward, but rather from instinctive feelings of solidarity.
In his introduction to the book, Kropotkin wrote:
The number and importance of mutual-aid institutions which were developed by the creative genius of the savage and half-savage masses, during the earliest clan-period of mankind and still more during the next village-community period, and the immense influence which these early institutions have exercised upon the subsequent development of mankind, down to the present times, induced me to extend my researches to the later, historical periods as well; especially, to study that most interesting period—the free medieval city republics, whose universality and influence upon our modern civilization have not yet been duly appreciated. And finally, I have tried to indicate in brief the immense importance which the mutual-support instincts, inherited by mankind from its extremely long evolution, play even now in our modern society, which is supposed to rest upon the principle "every one for himself, and the State for all," but which it never has succeeded, nor will succeed in realizing".[18]
Kropotkin advocated an alternative economic and social system, which would be coordinated through a horizontal network of voluntary associations with goods distributed in compliance with the physical needs of the individual, rather than according to labor.[19]
Thepolitical philosophy of the early twentieth century, condensed into the concept of solidarity, sought to offer both ascientific theory of social interdependence and amoral solution tosocial problems. According to some scholars, the emergence of this new rationality was made possible by the concept of social risk and the idea and technology of insurance developed to manage it. Social risk is defined as the risk to a group of people, statistically speaking, which is caused in one way or another by their living together and which can be mitigated by a technique of joint and severalliability such asinsurance.[13]
It has been said that insurance can be seen as one of the institutions of thesocial contract. The way insurance works requires individuals to take acollective responsibility or the events they feel the need to prepare for. Society can be said to have become 'modern' when insurance becomes social insurance and when, thanks to the techniques and institutions of insurance, the insurance model becomes both a symbolic and a functional basis for the social contract.[13]
Solidarity andjustice are key principles underpinning the insurance system, according toRisto Pelkonen and Timo Somer. In the context of voluntary personal insurance, solidarity means that the insured share the benefits and costs between themselves, while justice means that each insured contributes to the costs according to the actuarial probability. Social insurance, on the other hand, is available to all citizens, regardless of their choice and health status, as the costs are covered bytax revenues andstatutory contributions.[20]
Solidarity, or solidarism, is widely seen as the central foundation of thewelfare state.[13][21][22][23] Among other things, the advent of statutorysocial insurance andsocial law in the 20th century changedsocial thinking and enabled the breakthrough of the solidarity paradigm. The emergence of solidarity in social law can be thought of as being based on the norm of collective provisioning as the foundation ofsocial justice. However, it can be argued that the justification for social regulation and solidarity is not necessarily apositivenormative logic, but rather generalcivil rights.Human rights are intended to apply equally to all people and are more akin to a legal 'law' than to a normative logic. The formation of welfare policy can therefore be thought of as being based onhuman and civil rights with a completely different logic, rather than on a collective norm.[13]
According to Professor Heikki Ervast, however, three basic concepts can be associated withNordic welfare states: macro-collectivism, universalism and solidarism. In simple terms, macro-collectivism means that recipients and payers of transfers do not need to know each other. Universalism means that thesocial protection andservices of thewelfare state apply to all citizens. Solidarism means that the welfare state is not simply an instrument designed to guarantee social peace, but is based on solidarity, human dignity, and equality. Pauli Forma, Associate Professor of Social Policy at theUniversity of Turku, has summarised the central role of solidarity as the ethical basis of the welfare state: 'The welfare state is an institution of collective solidarity'. In other words, a welfare state is ademocratic andprosperous state thatcollectively shows solidarity by taking responsibility for the social security andequality of its citizens and for helping the disadvantaged. The welfare state can be said to be the "invisible hand of solidarity", in the same way that the "invisible hand of the market" is at work in afree market economy.
A solidarity tax is afee imposed by the government of some countries to finance projects that serve, in theory, to unify or solidarize the country. It is usually imposed for a short period of time in addition onincome tax ofindividuals, privateentrepreneurs, andlegal entities.[24][25][26]
InGermany, the solidarity tax was first introduced afterGerman reunification. The tax amounted to 7.5% of the amount of income tax payable (for individuals) and income tax payable (for legal entities). It was later abolished and reintroduced from 1995 to December 31, 1997, after which it was reduced to 5.5% on January 1, 1998.[27][28] The legality of the tax was repeatedly challenged, but it was recognized by the German Federal Financial Court as not contrary to theGerman Constitution. The long-term assessment of the solidarity tax was considered unconstitutional in Germany.[24]
InItaly, the solidarity tax was first introduced in 2012. All individuals whose annualgross income exceeds €300,000 are required to pay a 3% tax on the amount exceeding this amount.[29]
InFrance, thesolidarity tax on wealth was introduced in 1981; in September 2017, the French government abolished the solidarity tax and replaced it with a wealth tax on real estate starting in 2018. It was paid by all citizens and married couples whose property exceeded 1.3 million euros on January 1. The tax ranged from 0.5% to 1.5% of the value of property exceeding 800,000 euros.[30]
In 2013 the solidarity tax was also introduced in theCzech Republic in response toeconomic recession and was cancelled in 2021. In this country it was 7% for all residents earning more thanCZK 100,000 per month.[31]
Solidarity is discussed inphilosophy within its various sub-fields of law,ethics, andpolitical philosophy.[32] Ancient philosophers such asSocrates andAristotle discuss solidarity from within avirtue ethics framework, because in order to live a good life one must perform actions and behave in a way that is in solidarity with the community.[citation needed]
An approach inbioethics is to identify solidarity as a three-tiered practice enacted at the interpersonal, communal, and contractual and legal levels.[11] This approach is driven by the quest to differentiate between the diverse applications of the concept and to clarify its meaning, both historically and in terms of its potential as a fruitful concept for contemporary moral, social, and political issues.[33] The modern practice of bioethics is significantly influenced by ImmanuelKant's concept of theCategorical Imperative. Pastor and philosopherFritz Jahr's article "Bio-Ethics: A Review of the Ethical Relationships of Humans to Animals and Plants" refines Kant's original Categorical Imperative discourse[34] by including the notion of the Bioethical Imperative[definition needed].[35] Biomedical technology has also further introduced solidarity as the pivotal concept in bioethics. Another scholar, Ruud ter Meulen, discusses the need for solidarity within European health and social care systems, through organizations likeSolidar.[36]
Fritz Jahr describes bioethics as ultimately made up of “academic discipline, principle, and virtue.”[35] This reflects the influence of Socrates on the norms and practices of bioethics. Jahr utilizes Kant’s Categorical Imperative to demonstrate the obligatory, yet innately human, practice of the Bioethical Imperative:
“The guiding principle for our actions is the Bioethical Imperative: Respect every living being in general as an end in itself, and treat it, if possible, as such.”
— Fritz Jahr, Bioethical Imperative
This imperative arises in relationships not only among humans but also with plants and other animal species. Jahr believes that to practice bioethics, one must be in solidarity with all forms of life. If one chooses to limit this solidarity only to humans, then one cannot truly behave virtuously in any meaningful sense.[37]
| Part ofa series on |
| Catholic social teaching |
|---|
 |
| Overview |
 Catholic Church portal |
Solidarity is an element ofCatholic social teaching. According toPope Francis:
No one can remain insensitive to the inequalities that persist in the world... the Brazilian people, particularly the humblest among you, can offer the world a valuable lesson in solidarity, a word that is too often forgotten or silenced because it is uncomfortable... I would like to make an appeal to those in possession of greater resources, to public authorities and to all people of good will who are working for social justice: never tire of working for a more just world, marked by greater solidarity[38]
The Church's teaching on solidarity is explained in theCompendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, and briefly summarised in theCatechism of the Catholic Church:[39]
- 1939
- The principle of solidarity, also articulated in terms of "friendship" or "social charity," is a direct demand of human and Christian brotherhood
- 1940
- Solidarity is manifested in the first place by the distribution of goods and remuneration for work. It also presupposes the effort for a more just social order where tensions are better able to be reduced and conflicts more readily settled by negotiation.
- 1941
- Socio-economic problems can be resolved only with the help of all the forms of solidarity: solidarity of the poor among themselves, between rich and poor, of workers among themselves, between employers and employees in a business, solidarity among nations and peoples. International solidarity is a requirement of the moral order; world peace depends in part upon this
- 1942
- The virtue of solidarity goes beyond material goods. In spreading the spiritual goods of the faith, the Church has promoted, and often opened new paths for, the development of temporal goods as well. And so throughout the centuries has the Lord's saying been verified: "Seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well."
Solidarity is an important part of the teachings God sent down to theProphet Muhammad. Indeed, Muslims were called upon in theQur'an to unify under one banner, that of Islam, as equals before God. This centred around principles of brotherhood (ukhuwwa), social responsibility (al-takaful al-ijtima'i) and almsgiving (zakat orsadaqa). The central teaching to Islam is to subject oneself to God, and that, in this pursuit, all are equal before Him.
This is not only applicable to the Muslim community. Other religious communities, especially thepeople of the book, are traditionally accepted as true believers and protected communities. This lesson is drawn fromSurat al-Ma'ida, verse 48.[43] Although opinions differ on this matter,Seyyed Hossein Nasr notes that the majority opinion of Islamic scholars is that this verse pertains to a universal acceptance of other religions.[44]
In modern history,pan-Islamism was an important driver of inter-Islamic solidarity movements. This movement sought to mobilize a trans-nationalimagined community in the wake of a perceived decline of the Muslim world to regain its former political glory. Pan-Islamism is often associated with anti-colonialism and anti-imperialism.[45] Whilst this is true for later period, early pan-Islamic thinkers such asJamāl al-Dīn al-Afghānī andSyed Ameer Ali sought to make use of pan-Islamic ideals to fight for Muslim rights within the colonial framework of the United Kingdom and theconcert of Europe of which theOttoman Caliphate was a part.[46] In the 1920s, theKhalifat Movement made use of British concessions during World War I to combat theTreaty of Sèvres.[47] And, in the 1930s, theWorld Islamic Congress was held in Jerusalem to negotiate a settlement forPalestinian independence within the confines of theBritish Mandate.[48] Pan-Islamist ideas of society (Ar.umma,mujtamiʿ, oral-hayʾa al-ijtimāʿiyya) were characterised bymodernist interpretations of Islam and a general acceptance of other religions.[49]
Others in that period sought to implement Islamic solidarity principles from the bottom up. In Egypt,Hassan al-Banna established theMuslim Brotherhood in 1928 to organize society on the basis of Islamic ethical and social values, including social welfare and solidarity with the disenfranchised.[50] Operating in the capitalist setting of interwar Egypt and drawing on Islamic rights to property, they made the pragmatic decision to advocate an Islamic economy that stressed Egyptian ownership over factories and emphasized social welfare.[51]
Takāful is a difficult to translate word that might best be translated as a combination of solidarity, mutual responsibility, and cooperative insurance. Thinkers likeMustafa al-Siba'i, the leader of theSyrian Muslim Brotherhood, have employed the term to argue forIslamic Socialism, arguing that socialism was most in line with Islamic teachings on al-takāful al-ijtimāʿī (En. social solidarity).[52] Al-Siba'i identified ten levels of social responsibility and solidarity:[53][54]
Since the 1970s,takāful became theorised in Islamic finance as "a scheme where the participants are the insureds as well as the insurers and therefore share in the loss or profit of the operator, unlike insurance companies, where the risk is borne solely by the insurers"[55]
Media from Commons
Quotations from Wikiquote
Data from Wikidata
