No democracy without solidarity

In times of rising prices, budget cuts and growing uncertainty, many people find it difficult to put their own needs aside in favour of the needs of others. In her new book, States of Solidarity: How to Build a Society, political scientist Barbara Prainsack at the University of Vienna examines how forms of mutual support can restore trust and cohesion in fragmented societies. 

We invited Prainsack and legal scholar Elisabeth Holzleithner at the University of Vienna to come join us at the Rudolphina studio. Together, they argue that solidarity is needed to hold democracy together. According to our two experts, cutting back on institutional solidarity in areas such as healthcare and education is short-sighted. Practising solidarity from an early age is important, and therefore, it should be embedded in school curricula as an integral part of education. 

Rudolphina: What exactly is solidarity?

Elisabeth Holzleithner: Solidarity means standing up for one another. This may also mean putting one's own interests aside to support others. I consider it essential that we must not restrict our sense of solidarity to the groups to which we belong. As a society, we need to foster inclusive solidarity that transcends one's own group and perceived boundaries. These boundaries can be cultural, gender-based or language-based.

Barbara Prainsack: Of course, it makes sense to join forces within communities of interest to make a difference. Without solidarity in the workers' movement, many of the rights we enjoy today would not exist. Solidarity often has its roots in specific groups whose members have shared experiences of disadvantage or exclusion – and that is important. 

However, problems arise when solidarity ends at the borders of one's own community of interest. It is crucial to view your own concerns not in isolation, but as part of something bigger; the fight for the rights and recognition of a certain group should go hand in hand with the awareness that a fairer society can only be achieved by taking different perspectives into account. One of today's major challenges is making concrete improvements for specific groups without excluding others or losing sight of what we have in common.

Altruism and rights

Rudolphina: Does solidarity begin where justice ends? 

Holzleithner: One concept of solidarity is sometimes neglected in theories of justice – altruism. Many classical liberal theories of justice are founded on the principles of cooperation and reciprocity, based on the idea of 'I give so that you give', and vice versa. Solidarity goes beyond that. It is shown voluntarily, without any expectation of receiving something in return.

Prainsack: At the same time, we can translate solidarity into rights. For example, take our social security system, which is financed based on the principle of solidarity. It allows people to claim certain benefits. You could say that justice is toothless without solidarity. And solidarity has no teeth without the law – it needs the law to take effect.

Rudolphina: What is the value of solidarity in a democracy? 

Holzleithner: Solidarity is a central virtue of democracy. Democracy works only if we recognise what we have in common despite all our differences, and manage to translate this understanding into action. For a democracy based on solidarity to function, it is essential that we consider other people's perspectives and do not view our own position as absolute.

Prainsack: Solidarity is also supported in authoritarian states, usually in a top-down approach. The state supports certain groups and offers social benefits but expects loyalty and political alignment in return. Conversely, forms of solidarity that emerge among citizens independently of the state are often viewed with suspicion as they may be perceived as a threat to the political order. 

Democracies, in contrast, thrive on people joining forces independently and standing up for each other. Horizontal solidarity, i.e. solidarity among citizens, is not considered a threat in democracies, but rather an important component of a vibrant democracy.

Rudolphina: Is solidarity currently under increasing pressure? 

Prainsack: The value of solidarity is not under pressure, but certain forms of solidarity are. Populist movements often try to mobilise voters in the name of solidarity – solidarity with Austrians, with the Christian West, and so on. The problem is that inclusive solidarity that extends beyond one's own group has come under pressure.

Holzleithner: This is also evident in the fact that investments in solidarity-based infrastructures are currently no longer considered smart investments for the future. We see this in a political course that prioritises savings that relieve budgets in the short term, but that will cost us dearly in the long term. If our solidarity systems are no longer adequately equipped, people will be less willing to contribute to them. If people fear that they will get nothing in return for their contributions in future, the practice of solidarity will disappear.
 

How can we strengthen solidarity?

Rudolphina: How can we strengthen solidarity?

Prainsack: Let us start with institutionalised solidarity – we need an efficient healthcare system, good education, affordable, stable housing. When people experience security in these areas, they find it easier to put their own needs aside in specific situations. This trust in the system is crucial. However, if people feel they are on their own, fending for themselves, they may develop 'tunnel vision'. 

Holzleithner: An inclusive education system can make a decisive contribution. Solidarity cannot simply be decreed from above – it must be actively pursued and practised. We should start practising it early on.