The Concept of Solidarity in the Society
In political discourse but also in the theoretical debate of the social sciences, the idea of solidarity is very contested and open for many interpretations. It either describes a feeling, a behavior, a type of relation or an attitude. In many cases it is used as a synonym of altruism.
Rational-Choice-theorists, on the other hand, have emphasized that, although motivations can be self-less in the short-term, in the long-term solidarity maximizes the benefits of the group. Its function is to help overcome the free-rider-problem: given the chance to take advantage of the group, people still act in solidarity. Many theoreticians have criticized this approach, because often altruistic behaviors are not connected to any long-term advantage (e.g. caring for animals). Nevertheless, this model is useful as a theoretical basis for reciprocal solidary mechanisms. This solidarity type could be called rational or pragmatic solidarity as opposed to an emotional solidarity, which originates from the empathic identification with a person in need.
In any case, solidarity implies costs for the person showing solidarity. Therefore, the inclusion to the solidary group is viewed as being bound to conditions. On the micro-level, the building of trust is a relevant factor. On the macro-level, however, the anonymity impedes the building of trust. To accomplish a solidary project on the macro-level, its institutionalization is a necessity, the development of the welfare-state being its most notable result.
The solidary condition most often thought of is ethnicity. With the rise of ethnic-nationalism we have also seen a rise of support for welfare-chauvinistic policies from far-right parties. Additional solidarity conditions have been studied in the distributive justice research. Researchers have agreed on three principles of distributive justice: need, merit and equality. Need and merit correspond to the solidary conditions of neediness and accomplishment/effort, attitudes towards equality signal a lack of solidary conditions. Through the combination of these different conditions of solidarity, we can think of different types of solidary inclusion. The question is, what circumstances activate solidary conditions, so that social groups are included or excluded. The empirical research on this topic is contradictory. My focus in this paper is on the effect that structures of space have on trust building, solidary relations and discrimination. It is a well-supported fact, that cities are less conservative, allow for more multiculturalism and tend to express more cosmopolitan attitudes. In that sense, the ethnic condition of solidarity seems to barely play a role. Some have suggested the contacthypothesis: the more people are in contact with each other, the more they trust each other.
However, it has also been stated, that especially in urban and sub-urban areas, were a SE Urban Globalisation as Postnational Politics: Societal Diversity in Theory and Practice Leo Kovatsch high percentage of traditional worker families live side by side with migrant families, conflictive and competitive attitudes tend to grow into xenophobic resentments.
Of course, one explanation for this seeming contradiction could be that higher concentrations of migrants combined with poor economic conditions lead to hostile sentiments. But instead of focusing only on the quantity of the encounters, one could also take into account the quality of these contacts with other social groups and the urban structures that facilitate them. Nevertheless, solidarity - it is what can help people from poorly protected or unprotected social groups to have support and understanding from each other.
