Changing Solidarity
In some areas of our public life a shared sense of civility seems
to have been delegitimated as a binding norm we can reliably
invoke; that is, not merely that people behave uncivilly, but that
the charge “That was uncivil” carries little or no weight. So I
think there is adecline in civility and that this decline matters.
(Lawrence Cahoone 2000b: 145)
Contemporary solidarity is different from what it has been in earlier
times. Broad societal changes have had an impact on the forms and manifestations
of solidarity: the individualization process, the decline of religiosity
in Western societies, the economic reforms that have taken place
in many welfare states, changing patterns in family life, changing gender
roles, the development of the information and communication technology,
and, last but not least, the migration processes occurring throughout
the world. As a consequence of immigration new religious and political
identities present themselves to the inhabitants of the Western world,
giving rise to new questions and concerns about solidarity. These societal
changes do not necessarily cause a decline in solidarity, as is often
assumed. In certain domains solidarity may increase; in others it may
merely adopt a new shape. In this chapter, I briefly examine some of
the main dimensions that may be involved in the transformation in
solidarity: individualization, diversification, and globalization. Mainly
cultural critics have reflected on these societal transformations, but their
conclusions only incidentally extend to the consequences for social ties
and solidarity. This is understandable because it is almost impossible
to connect broad societal changes causally to changes in solidarity. The
societal changes are too complex and solidarity is too multifarious to
allow clear causal statements. In the second part of this chapter I address
some changes in contemporary solidarity and, where possible, support
these with empirical data.
A first and overriding societal change is the individualization process.
This development has its starting point in the nineteenth century (although
its roots go back to a more distant past) and has been reflected
on by classical sociologists like Durkheim and Simmel. In their view one
of the consequences of individualization is that solidarity would become
more abstract.With the modernization of society people would come to
participate in an ever larger number of partly overlapping social circles.
This would enlarge their individual possibilities to choose; loosen the
former tightly knit ties of family, neighborhood, and church; and weaken
the formerly existing solidarity patterns.
A second and related development is diversification: of identities, preferences,
convictions, and commitments. It is assumed that the former
continuity and stability of human identity are disappearing, and that the
sharing of beliefs, roots, or traditions with fellow human beings is becoming
less self-evident. Although modern individuals are more capable
than ever to assert their own selves, they are at the same time experiencing
a growing insecurity about what is going on in society, socially, culturally,
and materially. The presence of an increasing number of “strangers” in
modern Western societies adds substantially to this uncertainty. Hospitality
toward strangers, once a moral obligation and a daily practice all
over the world, has lost its former meaning as an expression of solidarity.
The third change concerns the globalization process, the widening of
political, economic, technological, social, and cultural borders allowing
for worldwide interconnections between organizations and people that
create new possibilities and exigencies for solidarity. One manifestation
of this development is the new communication technology, in particular
the Internet, which creates new networks between millions of people.