Solidarity and Social Justice
Blok 4
Universiteit Utrecht
Week 1
Knowledge clip 1 – solidarity; historical and sociological roots
Durkheim is the most important in the sociological perspective of solidarity.
Historical roots of solidarity
- Common identity shared aims and interests
- Family / kinship historically most important ties.
- Fraternity extension beyond family ties to include voluntary relationships. E.g.
from Christian to political value
- Community
o Gemeinschaft shared life experiences (work, community); community; a
willingness to share resources
o Gesellschaft society (solidarity as a moral principle underlying society (and
the welfare state)).
So first family was the most important to provide solidarity. Fraternity and community is not
that different from each other. Changes are important in the shift of solidarity. The
community can be separated in gemeinschaft and gesellschaft.
Sociological roots of solidarity
- First definition solidarity: sociological critique of social contract (Hobbes, Locke,
Spencer).
Social contract: implicit societal agreement about sharing resources.
- Critics argued that the social contract theory is acting too individualistic
- Leroux solidarity based on shared values.
- Comte solidarity as an integrative mechanism in society. Something that holds the
society together.
- Durkheim: mechanical VS organic solidarity.
He is developing on earlier sociologists.
Mechanical solidarity
o Pre-industrial (traditional) society
o Little differentiation – sameness
o Collective consciousness
o Material element: people are alike
o Subjective element: people think alike
Organic solidarity
o Modern (industrial) society
o Specialisation / high degree of differentiation / division of labour
o Individual consciousness
o Interdependence
Psychological roots of solidarity
- Cooperation/altruism/prosocial behaviour
, - Belongingness/affiliation
- Social identity/inclusion & exclusion
Knowledge clip 2 – forms of solidarity: a sociological perspective
Forms of solidarity (Hopman and Knijn, 2022; Bayertz, 1999)
1. Human solidarity about ties that have a natural foundations. Like family.
2. Social solidarity cohesive element in the society. Durkheim’s form of solidarity. It
is an integrative mechanism
3. Political solidarity has a more active basis. People are standing up for their
common interests.
4. Civic solidarity welfare state solidarity. Resources that are spread among citizens.
Governments are exhibiting the solidarity here. More normative aspect of solidarity.
Two critics on the forms: It is unclear who is giving the solidarity and who is receiving the
solidarity. They have an assumption where one of these forms is exclusive.
Exclusionary ingroup solidarity solidarity in a group with the same interests and values.
They exclude the people who have not the same interests.
Inclusionary outgroup solidarity solidarity in a group where different people, views and
interests are together. There is interdependence between the different groups, so they are
showing solidarity to this group.
What triggers/drives social justice and solidarity as well as form of boundary drawing:
- Social identifications
- Interests
- Socio-cultural context: power-relations, scarcity of resources, media
With whom are we solidaristic?
- Citizenship rights (Marshall, 1950) the rights that a person has, are based on their
citizenship. Some individuals who don’t have citizenship are more dependent on
volunteers. Citizens have rights, where the government is responsible for.
o Social citizenship rights paternity leave, social security, health insurance.
o Civil citizenship rights quality under the law
- Boundary drawing who deserves our protection and who doesn’t?
Knowledge clip 3 – The Social Identity Approach: the basics
The Social Identity Approach (Tajfel & Turner, 1979)
- Individual identity what makes you unique
- Social identity the groups you belong to
- Ingroups us
- Outgroups them
Creating a group is easy, and when you are assigned to a group it is easy to work with them
and feel like them. Even if the point where you become a group has no meaning. You will
always come up for your own group. minimal group paradigm.
- Function of groups:
o Uncertainty reduction / sense-making guidance who to act and behave
, o Affiliation / need to belong essential to human need
o (optimal distinctiveness) need for feeling of uniqueness. Like an individual.
o Striving for positive self-concept high status groups enhances self-esteem.
Social Identity Theory (intergroup behaviour)
- Striving for positive self-concept ingroup favouritism & outgroup derogation
Self Categorization Theory (intragroup behaviour)
- Activation of identity based on: accessibility & fit.
- We want to categorize the groups as far as possible from each other.
Social identity threats
- Distinctiveness threat group distinctiveness is prevented or undermined. Want to
differentiate ingroup and outgroup.
- Group-value threat the group’s (moral) values or competence are undermined
- Categorization threat being categorized against one’s will
- Acceptance threat one’s position within the group is undermined. You get rejected
by ingroup.
The degree of threat influenced by: level of identification with the group
Knowledge clip 4 – facilitating intergroup solidarity
Common Ingroup Identity Model
- Create a superordinate identity.
- Reduction of ingroup favouritism and outgroup derogation
Possible drawbacks
- Distinctiveness threat rejection of superordinate identity
- Reduced striving of social change by disadvantaged groups
Comparing Common Ingroup and Dual Identities (Ufkes et al, 2009)
- Separate group VS Common ingroup VS Dual group Identity.
Dual group ?
Results:
Separate: own group identity
important for wellbeing
Common: superordinate
identity -> decreases protest
intentions for disadvantaged
group members
Dual: both need to be in
balance to have a good
wellbeing, multiple identities
should co-exist.
Social Identity Model of Collective Action (Van Zomeren et al., 2008) predicting protest
behaviour.
Blok 4
Universiteit Utrecht
Week 1
Knowledge clip 1 – solidarity; historical and sociological roots
Durkheim is the most important in the sociological perspective of solidarity.
Historical roots of solidarity
- Common identity shared aims and interests
- Family / kinship historically most important ties.
- Fraternity extension beyond family ties to include voluntary relationships. E.g.
from Christian to political value
- Community
o Gemeinschaft shared life experiences (work, community); community; a
willingness to share resources
o Gesellschaft society (solidarity as a moral principle underlying society (and
the welfare state)).
So first family was the most important to provide solidarity. Fraternity and community is not
that different from each other. Changes are important in the shift of solidarity. The
community can be separated in gemeinschaft and gesellschaft.
Sociological roots of solidarity
- First definition solidarity: sociological critique of social contract (Hobbes, Locke,
Spencer).
Social contract: implicit societal agreement about sharing resources.
- Critics argued that the social contract theory is acting too individualistic
- Leroux solidarity based on shared values.
- Comte solidarity as an integrative mechanism in society. Something that holds the
society together.
- Durkheim: mechanical VS organic solidarity.
He is developing on earlier sociologists.
Mechanical solidarity
o Pre-industrial (traditional) society
o Little differentiation – sameness
o Collective consciousness
o Material element: people are alike
o Subjective element: people think alike
Organic solidarity
o Modern (industrial) society
o Specialisation / high degree of differentiation / division of labour
o Individual consciousness
o Interdependence
Psychological roots of solidarity
- Cooperation/altruism/prosocial behaviour
, - Belongingness/affiliation
- Social identity/inclusion & exclusion
Knowledge clip 2 – forms of solidarity: a sociological perspective
Forms of solidarity (Hopman and Knijn, 2022; Bayertz, 1999)
1. Human solidarity about ties that have a natural foundations. Like family.
2. Social solidarity cohesive element in the society. Durkheim’s form of solidarity. It
is an integrative mechanism
3. Political solidarity has a more active basis. People are standing up for their
common interests.
4. Civic solidarity welfare state solidarity. Resources that are spread among citizens.
Governments are exhibiting the solidarity here. More normative aspect of solidarity.
Two critics on the forms: It is unclear who is giving the solidarity and who is receiving the
solidarity. They have an assumption where one of these forms is exclusive.
Exclusionary ingroup solidarity solidarity in a group with the same interests and values.
They exclude the people who have not the same interests.
Inclusionary outgroup solidarity solidarity in a group where different people, views and
interests are together. There is interdependence between the different groups, so they are
showing solidarity to this group.
What triggers/drives social justice and solidarity as well as form of boundary drawing:
- Social identifications
- Interests
- Socio-cultural context: power-relations, scarcity of resources, media
With whom are we solidaristic?
- Citizenship rights (Marshall, 1950) the rights that a person has, are based on their
citizenship. Some individuals who don’t have citizenship are more dependent on
volunteers. Citizens have rights, where the government is responsible for.
o Social citizenship rights paternity leave, social security, health insurance.
o Civil citizenship rights quality under the law
- Boundary drawing who deserves our protection and who doesn’t?
Knowledge clip 3 – The Social Identity Approach: the basics
The Social Identity Approach (Tajfel & Turner, 1979)
- Individual identity what makes you unique
- Social identity the groups you belong to
- Ingroups us
- Outgroups them
Creating a group is easy, and when you are assigned to a group it is easy to work with them
and feel like them. Even if the point where you become a group has no meaning. You will
always come up for your own group. minimal group paradigm.
- Function of groups:
o Uncertainty reduction / sense-making guidance who to act and behave
, o Affiliation / need to belong essential to human need
o (optimal distinctiveness) need for feeling of uniqueness. Like an individual.
o Striving for positive self-concept high status groups enhances self-esteem.
Social Identity Theory (intergroup behaviour)
- Striving for positive self-concept ingroup favouritism & outgroup derogation
Self Categorization Theory (intragroup behaviour)
- Activation of identity based on: accessibility & fit.
- We want to categorize the groups as far as possible from each other.
Social identity threats
- Distinctiveness threat group distinctiveness is prevented or undermined. Want to
differentiate ingroup and outgroup.
- Group-value threat the group’s (moral) values or competence are undermined
- Categorization threat being categorized against one’s will
- Acceptance threat one’s position within the group is undermined. You get rejected
by ingroup.
The degree of threat influenced by: level of identification with the group
Knowledge clip 4 – facilitating intergroup solidarity
Common Ingroup Identity Model
- Create a superordinate identity.
- Reduction of ingroup favouritism and outgroup derogation
Possible drawbacks
- Distinctiveness threat rejection of superordinate identity
- Reduced striving of social change by disadvantaged groups
Comparing Common Ingroup and Dual Identities (Ufkes et al, 2009)
- Separate group VS Common ingroup VS Dual group Identity.
Dual group ?
Results:
Separate: own group identity
important for wellbeing
Common: superordinate
identity -> decreases protest
intentions for disadvantaged
group members
Dual: both need to be in
balance to have a good
wellbeing, multiple identities
should co-exist.
Social Identity Model of Collective Action (Van Zomeren et al., 2008) predicting protest
behaviour.
