Solidarity Module

Solidarity

And the Common Good

Local community activist and organizer Mar Valdecantos shares advocacy principals, like listen, learn, etc. during lecture at St. Olaf during Hispanic Heritage Month 2023. Photo by Mindyrose Sinykin.

By the end of this module, you will be able to:

Define the key components of solidarity
Articulate some of the considerations involved in building solidarity, including the ways in which solidarity and reciprocity are similar and different
Reflect on how you approach building solidarity
Apply concepts of solidarity to case studies involving ethical quandaries within community engagement.

Solidarity is a powerful concept that has proven challenging to define for activists and scholars alike. This challenge arises, in part, from the wide variety of contexts in which solidarity has been deployed: as a practice, a set of actions, driven by a desire to transform. Although some contemporary uses of the term associate solidarity with relatively passive actions, such as signing a petition or changing a profile picture, these symbolic actions in isolation contribute little to social change. One way to think about the difference between passive and active solidarity is to imagine a sliding scale from transactional (spectatorship, low-stakes symbolic participation) to transformative (long-term, deep commitment, often risky engagement). Regardless of its precise form, most scholars agree on a few key components to the practice of solidarity. Solidarity requires action around a shared goal or aspiration over time with other people. Let’s take each of these key components a step further.

Solidarity requires action. Solidarity cannot happen passively; it requires work and effort. If it feels comfortable, it’s likely not contributing to making change. Feelings of discomfort can be a sign that your actions are challenging social norms and questioning or critiquing systems, which can lead to changing those systems. Critical pedagogy scholars note, “The active pursuit of solidarity requires deliberate attention to power dynamics, but also to the histories and ideas that have produced present conditions” (Gaztambide-Fernández, Brant, and Desai, 256).

Solidarity is built around shared goals or aspirations. People are motivated to act in solidarity because they feel a sense of proximity to the issue at hand, whether they have a direct stake in the matter based on their own experience of oppression, or a connection (real or imagined) to others who have experienced marginalization. The sense of proximity can be physical, intellectual, emotional, or spiritual (see “Motivation” section below). Goals and aspirations may be clear-cut, such as halting the construction of an oil pipeline, or more difficult to measure, such as changing the culture of an institution to become more inclusive.

Solidarity is developed over time. Building solidarity requires a long-term investment of time and other resources (much in the same vein as antiracist commitments and inclusive practices). It takes time to build trust and to collectively shape the contours of a movement between people who have differing levels of knowledge, experience, and ability to contribute.

Solidarity requires more than one person. Some people feel compelled to do it all, and to forge ahead independently, but a number of successful social movements have demonstrated the power of collective action. No one can be in solidarity alone. By recognizing that each individual can only commit so much of their time and resources, and that we each have different privileges and resources at our disposal, it becomes essential to connect and build relationships with others who are committed to a shared purpose. Diverse ideas, skills, and passions contributed by those working together make it possible to transform oppressive systems.

Many movements for social change throughout history achieved their goals because people came together recognizing that change would not be immediate, and they committed to a sustained plan for maintaining solidarity with one another around their shared goal. Read more about some of these examples of solidarity movements in the US to investigate how the four key elements discussed above are combined in practice:

Why would someone desire to be in solidarity with others? Understanding the motivations for our solidarity efforts is directly linked to vocational discernment, which we at St. Olaf define as: “Life, on purpose, for the common good.” How is what I am doing on purpose, rooted in my personal values, and linked with others for the benefit of the common good? Sociologist and economist Jörg Althammer points to two main types of solidarity that hinge upon differing motivations.

Solidarity as a Social Contract The first type of solidarity is based on the idea of the social contract, where individuals join together around shared values, convictions, or beliefs that govern their actions. Under this umbrella, there are two ways to understand the motivations that bring individuals together in solidarity.

Shared Identity. In some cases, solidarity is concentrated within a group whose members share a specific social identity, and this commonality is the foundation of trust within the group that establishes a sense of moral unity between them (what sociologist Emile Durkheim would call “mechanic solidarity”). Solidarity within a specific social group based on a shared identity relies on homogeneity. Solidarity movements based on social identity can, at times, ignore other positions and intersecting identities that members hold in order to conform to the homogeneity of that group. Shared identity solidarity also tends to be “particularistic” by design, meaning that the beneficiaries of actions taken are limited to those who share that particular identity, such as a “by us, for us” mentality (Althammer, 8). For example, several of the movements in the list concluding the “Solidarity is not [just] a Feeling” section are formulated around a shared identity, such as the Woman Suffrage movement, the Occupation of Alcatraz, the Stonewall Uprising, and #CiteBlackWomen.
Mutual Interest. Alternatively, solidarity can be developed among people who share a mutual interest, despite having different social identities. Solidarity based on mutual interest is dependent on heterogeneity—people with a variety of identities—because different experiences and positionalities are needed to contribute different things to the cause (what Durkheim would call “organic solidarity”). Heterogeneity, while common in solidarity movements, requires more intentional and deliberate outreach to bring people into the work. Solidarity based on mutual interest can be understood as “universalistic,” meaning that there is a shared understanding that the effort being worked towards is either a universal human right or benefits more than just one particular group of people (Althammer, 20). For example, several of the movements in the list concluding the “Solidarity is not [just] a Feeling” section are formulated around a shared interest, such as the protests against the Vietnam War and the March for Our Lives. Note, however, that the “mutual interest” notion of solidarity has both positive and negative effects for the social cohesion in a society (ie. a band of criminals has solidarity with each other) as philosopher Kurt Bayertz stresses (cited in Althammer, 10).

Solidarity as a Virtue The second type of solidarity is more descriptive, noting how individuals can be drawn into solidarity based on their need for assistance from others in a similar situation (obligation, based on self-interest), or based on a reciprocal bond that is driven by a similarity in tastes and preferences (friendship, and explicitly non-instrumental).

Obligation points to a larger sense of collective responsibility or duty, regardless of proximity. For example, the way certain nation-states have designed social welfare programs denotes an obligatory approach at a high system-level.
Friendship, on the other hand, invokes a sense of more neighbor-to-neighbor interactions, or mutual togetherness or interconnectedness through interpersonal relationships. Althammer points out that solidarity based in friendship has been noted by other scholars to stem from Aristotle’s view of “perfect friendship” (7).

Your Positionality and Roles: Your role within a solidarity movement will depend on your own positionality (how you experience the world based on your intersecting identities and the associated power/privileges you are afforded). One role in a solidarity movement is that of an ally: someone from a dominant or majority group that is committed to supporting and advocating for those in marginalized and oppressed groups, but rarely engages in action that involves personal risk. In contrast, an accomplice goes further by using the power and privilege they have to challenge oppressive systems in a more direct way, often risking their physical and social well being. A co-conspirator is even more deeply embedded, as activist Brittany Packnett notes: “An ally shows up when it’s convenient. An accomplice shows up when there is a risk. A co-conspirator decides to go into the risk proactively because they helped create the plan in the first place” (hear Packnett’s full response here.)

Developing Motivations: Solidarity can look and feel different for each person based on how they show up and what gifts, skills, expertise, and knowledge they have to share. Building solidarity is challenging, and people enter this work at different levels of engagement and self-awareness. To one person, an action may feel deeply meaningful and genuine, while to another person, that same action may feel inauthentic and designed to garner praise (sometimes referred to as “performative”). It’s important to recognize that real harm can be done by individuals who are underprepared for solidarity work as a result of a lack of trust, clear motivations, and committed action. But it may be valuable to turn to curiosity in these moments, seeking to learn more about the individual’s motivation to join in solidarity with others and investing in a relationship with them (sometimes referred to as “calling in” rather than “calling out”). Practicing solidarity actions with a sense of self-awareness (see section below) can be a first step for someone who wants to get involved and work toward being in solidarity with others, before they are able to fully articulate their motivation. This process can help solidify the very purpose for their solidarity. Supporting people who are new to solidarity work can start by asking questions (see Reflection Questions: Expectations or Aspirations for Solidary Experiences). It is also important to recognize the labor, emotional and otherwise, involved in educating people who are entering this work, and attend to an equitable distribution of that labor.

The practice of solidarity is demonstrated by completing actions over a period of time that build on one another. So—what does the process of acting in solidarity over time really look like? Below is an adaptation of a process created by The Building Movement Project that has clear considerations and actions to take toward a defined goal: writing a solidarity statement for your organization. These considerations and steps can also be adapted and applied to other practices of solidarity.

The Solidarity Statement project’s core principles are outlined as follows:

Center the voices, needs, and demands of directly affected communities and organizations that represent them.
Connect the common roots of systemic injustice across movements, while acknowledging that we all hold distinct and similar histories and experiences of dealing with oppression.
Articulate visions of co-liberation, including mutual freedom and redistribution of power that recognizes that we can’t all be free, equal, or whole if any community is being oppressed.
Include ideas and examples of how we can be co-conspirators on the issue addressed, with respect, humility and accountability.
Design the statement not just for a one time event but as part of a sustainable, long-term, movement building strategy.

Before Taking Action

Clarify your vision and intended impact
Build and sustain relationships
Determine the type of message you want to send
Identify your audience and core messages
Determine your organizational capacity
Determine process and decision-making

During/After Taking Action

Assess the Impact of your Action
Debrief and Review

Note how the Building Movement’s process embeds a clear call to action in their core principles, relies on relationship building, and uses reflection as a tool to determine future steps and actions. For more information about each step, view the full guide at The Building Movement Project.

Since humans exist as social animals, and altruism is well documented among our species, solidarity as a practice has likely existed since the dawn of human society. Instances of mutual aid among communities of people around the world abound in historical accounts. The first recorded written evidence of “solidarity” as a concept, however, occurs in Roman Law with the concept of obligatio in solidum, which references the joint liability of people in debt to one or more of their creditors. Solidarity also emerges in other culturally specific contexts, including the seventh generation principle of the ancient Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) peoples of North America that reinforces the temporal nature of solidarity efforts. The West African indigenous concept of ubuntu emphasizes human interconnectedness and dignity first within one’s own cultural group, and secondly among all other human beings, including an ubuntic duty to slaves (Afolabi, 48). Shared identity solidarity has manifested in Christian “brotherhood” or fraternity organizations, for instance, while mutual interest solidarity emerged into the Western lexicon through labor organizing and trade unions at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution (Oxford English Dictionary).

The academic study of solidarity is spread across a variety of disciplines. Many of the scholars cited in this module (and whom they attribute their scholarly lineage to) arise from sociology and philosophy, notably Émile Durkheim, Ulf Tranow, and Jörg Althammer, where they tackle the concept of solidarity as a concept. Scholars have explored solidarity within other fields as well, and in many cases moved beyond theory to advocate for particular practices. For instance, the Black feminist Combahee River Collective contributed to an intersectional understanding of solidarity, noting how “We struggle together with Black men against racism, while we also struggle with Black men about sexism” (1977, 19). Brazilian educator and theorist Paolo Freire argued that “true solidarity” requires those who benefit from oppressive systems to sacrifice status and privilege in order to join the oppressed in fighting for freedom in his landmark publication, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970). Below are a few additional interpretations of solidarity generated from different academic disciplinary perspectives, with varying applications to the practice of solidarity:

Economics

Any discussion of solidarity that rests on expectations of compensation, incentives, need, and exchange are rooted in economic theory and practice. For instance, sociologist Ulf Tranow’s analysis of “solidarity norms” takes a Marxist approach when noting that there must be some sacrifice, without the expectation of compensation. Althammer notes that “the characteristic feature of solidarity is the unidirectional mode of interaction which comes along with the sacrifice of some kind of scarce resource (e.g. time, money, effort)” (14). Notions of solidarity are infused with capitalist terminology, particularly within a Western industrialized society such as the United States, because capitalism governs our everyday lives. Social scientists argue that solidarity resists the competitive capitalist individualism that pervades our society (hampton and Hartman 2022; Rubén Gaztambide-Fernández, Jennifer Brant and Chandni Desai 2022). In addition, ethical engagement often espouses taking an asset-based (instead of a deficit-based, or need-based) approach to working together. How can an economic approach to solidarity based on need be reconciled with an asset-based approach?

Religion

Solidarity as a moral imperative shows up in many religions and worldviews, a few instances of which are noted below. Catholic theological ethicist Conor Kelly argues that “everyday solidarity” based on a moral principle, is an effective antidote to individualism, particularly in capitalist societies like the United States. Kelly’s belief that “the relational perspective of everyday solidarity asks each person to examine his or her options in order to choose the actions that will provide the maximum benefits for his or her relationships” (431). This idea mirrors closely the Lutheran concept of vocational discernment and how one’s choices of their life roles (or how to respond to the roles we do not choose) affect those they are in relationship with and, as such, to consider the common good with respect to one’s vocational pathway. The contemporary concept of “Accompaniment” within the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA) and Liberation Theology more broadly advocates a “walking with and alongside” approach to mission work but they acknowledge this has not always been realized by members of their community.

In a blog post for the Lion’s Roar, novice Zen priest and anthropologist Dr. Doshin Nathan Wood describes the Zen Buddhist notion of karuna, or “active sympathy” embodied through empathy, in relationship with dana, or the “individual expression of sympathy for the shared good;” together, karuna and dana work towards communal solidarity. He cites a non-Buddhist example of this when he recalls how Dr. Larycia Hawkins’ call in December 2015 for Christians to wear a hijab for Advent in an act of “embodied solidarity” during the rise of anti-Muslim sentiment in the mid-2010s, an act that ultimately led to her own termination from the faculty at Wheaton College. See Dr. Hawkins’ presentation on the #EmbodiedSolidarity movement at St. Olaf College here.

Political Science

Solidarity often leans towards the political, a banding together to achieve, as Althammer puts it, a “recognition of social rights and the public provision of means that are necessary for a full participation in a political community” (11). Of course, this definition intersects with many of the examples already noted, but has manifested most concretely in the creation of the social welfare state whereby the government has an obligation to provide for its members. In addition, many solidarity movements have a clearly expressed goal of accruing more political power by making public policy changes that directly impact themselves and others. The creation of the UN Declaration of Human Rights (1948) is one example of several nation-states banding together in solidarity for the common good.

Reciprocity and solidarity as relational concepts appear on the surface to be nearly synonymous, but teasing out nuances can help us better understand how we are framing and showing up for ethical engagement with others. One approach is to consider reciprocity as a core value that is already embedded within a solidarity framework. Another approach is to consider that reciprocity is based on an expectation of exchange or transaction, whereas solidarity opens up the potential for exchange back and forth but can also be one-directional in support of a shared goal that does not necessarily result in tangible benefits for all participants; if you expect something in return, you are likely not acting in solidarity.

It may also be that people need to be in solidarity with an effort before they can ethically be in solidarity with people directly, such as in predominantly white institutions’ and communities’ work on the truth, healing, and reconciliation with their Indigenous neighbors. If reciprocity is seen primarily as a mutually beneficial exchange, reciprocity may not be appropriate given that settlers are on stolen lands and it is up to settlers to commit to a “solidarity sacrifice” (Tranow, 46), some sort of material transfer that is deliberately not reciprocal. It is the responsibility of settlers to determine how to proceed meaningfully based on the historical context of settler colonialism in their particular geographic locale and the current direction of sovereignty efforts led by Indigenous elders and neighbors.

In short, reciprocity can take the form of a one-time transaction, but solidarity requires effortful actions built over time with other people around a shared goal.

Afolabi, Michael Olusegun. 2015. “A Vulnerability/Solidarity Framework for a Global Ethic: Historical & Contemporary Applications.” Revista Română de Bioetică, 13(1): 44-68.

Althammer, Jörg. 2019. “Solidarity: From Small Communities to Global Societies.” In Solidarity in Open Societies, 5-23. Edited by Jörg Althammer, Bernhard Neumärker, and Ursula Nothelle-Wildfeuer. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

Boucher, Michael. 2020. More Than an Ally: A Caring Solidarity Framework for White Teachers of African American Students. Rowman & Littlefield.

Dean, Jodi. 1998. “Feminist Solidarity, Reflective Solidarity: Theorizing Connections after identity politics.” Women and Politics, 18(4): 1-26.

Dean, Jodi. 1996. Solidarity of Strangers: Feminism after Identity Politics. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Durkheim, Émile. 1893/1984. The Division of Labour in Society. Trans. George Simpson. London: Collier-Macmillan Limited.

Freire, Paulo. 1968/1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Trans. Myra Bergman Ramos. New York: Herder and Herder.

Gaztambide-Fernández, Rubén Jennifer Brant, and Chandni Desai. 2022. “Toward a Pedagogy of Solidarity.” Curriculum Inquiry, 52(3): 251-265.

hampton, rosalind and Michelle Hartman. 2022. “Solidarity in Multiple Registers.” Curriculum Inquiry, 52(3): 326-336.

Houston, Serin D. and Kirk Langeband Lange. 2018. “‘Global/Local’ Community Engagement: Advancing Integrative Learning and Situated Solidarity.” Journal of Geography in Higher Education. 42(1): 44-60.

Kelly, Conor M. 2020. “Everyday Solidarity: A Framework for Integrating Theological Ethics and Ordinary Life.” Theological Studies, 81(2): 414-37.

Taylor, Keeanga-Yamahtta, ed. 2017. How We Get Free: Black Feminism and the Combahee River Collective. Chicago: Haymarket Books.

Tranow, Ulf. 2019. “Solidarity as a System of Norms.” In Solidarity in Open Societies, 25-55. Edited by Jörg Althammer, Bernhard Neumärker, and Ursula Nothelle-Wildfeuer. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

“Solidarity Is This” Podcast: https://solidarityis.org/our-work/solidarity-is-this-podcast/

Interdependence: Global Solidarity and Local Actions Toolkit: https://www.cbglcollab.org/intro-to-toolkit

Solidarity Statement Examples:

Solidarity with the movement to stop Cop City & defend the Weelaunee Forest (2023)
Bay Area Latinx and Asian Community Groups Unite to Support Half Moon Bay Victims and Survivors (2023)
Movement for Black Lives Statement on Anti-Asian Violence (2021)
Solidarity Letter from the Immigrant Justice Movement (2020)
Lifted Voices Statement of Solidarity With the Water Protectors of #NoDAPL (2016)
Statement of the Palestinian Youth Movement USA Branch in Support of the Weekend of Resistance in St. Louis and Ferguson (2014)

These activities may be done individually, with classmates/group members, and/or with community partners. There is a set of questions and topics for before or at the beginning of the community engagement and another set that can be used during and/or after the experience. The questions are a labeled below for their suggested use.

What is your experience with solidarity, as defined in this module? Give at least one example of solidarity that you have observed directly, and briefly explain how it affected you.
How much time do you spend engaging with topics that don’t affect you personally?
What issues have you been motivated by, and why? Were your actions on this issue(s) an example of acting in solidarity? Why or why not?

What are some areas in which you do, and don’t, hold power because of your different identities and the ways that they intersect with each other? Refer to this Social Identity Wheel to guide your reflection.
How will your power and privilege change in the spaces you occupy and the people you engage with?
How can you help build a space of trust for people to share their lived experiences as it relates to your shared goals around relationship and community building?

How can you practice empathetic listening to center community priorities and the stories of others within your work? What are some other ways you give and make time for others to tell their story?
When discussing privileges, how can you work to make sure that you don’t perpetuate negative experiences that others (peers, partners) may have of you based on your (perceived or real) power differentials?
How will you respond if you do commit a microaggression or are told that you have harmed someone else?
How do you respond when someone questions your experiences, and what does your anticipated response tell you and others about the power and privilege you hold?
What can you learn from other people’s experiences when they have felt unsafe and work to address systemic barriers to safety and well-being?
When we know we have limited time in any one place or in any one relationship (i.e., like four years on a college campus, or a single semester abroad), how do we act in solidarity in the most ethical and responsible way?

Solidarity is generally thought of as the glue that holds society together, based on commitments to better include ALL people and groups in the pursuit of the common good, and in the spirit of universal humanity. Yet, the meaning of solidarity can become more complex and fraught after having had experience with it.

How has your experience with solidarity in this class been different from your initial expectations or your previous experiences (academic, volunteer, or paid) with community engagement and solidarity efforts?
- How have you been challenged emotionally, intellectually, and physically?
- Describe a specific situation that challenged being in solidarity with others. Why do you think it was challenging? What did you learn about the impact of social identities on community engagement?
How does vocation (Life on Purpose. For the Common Good) play a role in solidarity expression?

Consider the following questions about what solidarity means to you based on your experience. Try to come up with specific examples from your experience that inform your response.

What does acting in solidarity mean to you? How is solidarity different from charity?
Solidarity is not a feeling or belief; it is an action that requires an investment of time, resources, humility, and relationships. Do you agree or disagree? Why?
Solidarity is not something you can achieve, it’s something you continually practice. Do you agree or disagree? Why?
How might positionality and a person’s explicit or complicit role in systems of power affect who is responsible for shouldering the effort of solidarity?
When you are practicing being in solidarity, can it be with a group of people, or an issue/effort, or both? In other words, does being in solidarity have to be based on relationships between people? And if so, how can we frame global solidarity around relationship building? Can you be in solidarity with people who are not in proximity (physical, intellectual, emotional, or spiritual) with you?
What are potential downfalls or negative results (social, political, etc.) of solidarity?

As you read through the case studies, you might also consider one or more of these frameworks for interpreting solidarity, its practices, and manifestations in real-world situations. Most scholars agree that context matters! Here are a few frameworks to consider as you evaluate situations of solidarity.

Altruistic vs. Cooperative Solidarity: Althammer outlines the following “Taxonomy of Solidarity” that places solidarity within two large categories: either as altruistic or cooperative in specific or abstract circumstances.

Taxonomy of Solidarity (Althammer)
Mode of Social Interaction	Example	Considerations
Cooperative Solidarity (Reciprocal)	Specific example: Cooperative Solidarity Unions, pressure groups, mutual insurance associations	How can labor-based solidarity efforts, for instance, take into account members’ intersectional identities?
Cooperative Solidarity (Reciprocal)	Abstract example: Antagonistic Solidarity Non-homogeneous private goods, credence goods (markets)	How might we acknowledge tension within cooperative situations between competing interests, such as employer-employee relationships?
Altruistic Solidarity(Unidirectional)	Specific example: Altruistic Solidarity Gifts, Alms (Family, Private Charity Organizations)	Who decides what the “gift” is? How does the giver know that it is needed?
Altruistic Solidarity(Unidirectional)	Abstract example: Political Solidarity Public goods (National and Transnational Welfare State, UN Sustainable Development Goals)	How do you actually get nation-states to work together to align goals and equitable distribution of resources?

Situated Solidarity: Houston and Lange argue for a need for “situated solidarity” in local and global engagement that “emphasizes that solidarity efforts must be sensitive to context because solidarity is not homogenous in form or expression” (45). They take a geographical/spatial approach to their framework as they consider the following three components to situated solidarity:

Situated Solidarity (Houston and Lange)
Mode of Social Interaction	Example
Contour Lines Investigate “points of commonality and distinctness” among community engaged experience “in more than one location” and that asks participants to “critically examine their roles and interactions in and through different sites.	Different communities have parallel experiences of colonialism and land stewardship practices which take different forms in each of those communities (47)
Co-labor Experientially working together with others that “disrupt normative hierarchies and structures that classrooms can help perpetuate” (48).	Students working alongside farmers to help pick vegetables for a community garden.
Accompaniment A mindset built through “amplifying and accounting for a plurality of voices and understanding that a fuller understanding of a problem, idea, activity or vision emerges through this diversity” (49).	Working with community members to crafting a space for intentional dialogue around land use practices between conventional agriculture and regenerative farmers.

Reflective Solidarity: Feminist political theorist Jodi Dean’s concept of “reflective solidarity” argues for a third path for solidarity that seeks to “bridge the gap between ‘identity and universality’,” to create a “we without labels” (Althammer, 12).

Reflective Solidarity (Dean)

Discourse and Dialogue

A back and forth among those wishing to be in solidarity together. Dean acknowledges that this discourse is often uncomfortable, fraught, and risky, particularly as it attends attention to history, power differentials, and ongoing questions of exclusion. Ultimately, the discourse and its risks remain worth the effort, as “by turning our attention away from ourselves and toward our interconnections, we reconceive our differences as opportunities, as perspectives and talents that give us new understandings of the relations of power in some peoples’ lives as well as new ways to combat and resist them” (Dean 1997, 7).

Accountability

The active discussion and discernment of the shared goals works to create a coalition, but also illuminates gaps in thinking and perspectives. Who’s at the table? Who isn’t? Who wasn’t thought to be invited? Who has dominated the air time of the discussion? Who hasn’t been able to get a word in? Discussion “enables us to take responsibility for how we learn to see, making us account for exclusions and omissions even when, in fact especially when, they appear inevitable or unavoidable” (Dean, 1997, 24).

The following case study is based on an actual occurrence at St. Olaf, but some of the particulars have been changed. As you read through the case study below, consider how the duration of the experience, the location, and the level of engagement may shape participation and affect relationships. Solidarity focuses on power and process and requires an intentional practice of building relationships grounded in trust around a shared goal or aspiration. The potential for building solidarity will vary according to phase, activity, purpose and the people involved.

A BIPOC student group, committed to supporting and advocating for BIPOC students on campus, identifies barriers to accessing a peer support program that they feel disproportionately affects BIPOC students. The barriers are based on their own experiences with the program, but also informal reports from their peers. All members of the group have varying experience attending this peer support program (some attend more frequently than others, some have more positive/negative than others), and one is a peer support leader themselves.

The group contacts the peer support coordinator (a white cis woman who is new to the college, and who has a master’s degree in education) to share their concerns. They set up an in-person meeting with the student group and peer support coordinator to discuss. In addition to identifying what works and what doesn’t, in their point of view, they make specific requests for policy changes that would create more equitable access.

The requests include:

Creating a standardized system for establishing expectations at the beginning of each semester that is communicated with faculty and students.
Developing in-person bias and inclusivity training to replace the asynchronous virtual bias training currently offered to peer support leaders, ideally led by BIPOC students and/or staff. The training should include interpersonal skills (using students’ names) and instructional skills (leading inclusive discussions, reaching out specifically to students who are struggling, using flexible lesson plans to adapt to student needs).
Offering individual peer support for students who are not comfortable working in a group setting.

While the changes benefit BIPOC students, the peer support coordinator recognizes that ALL students will benefit from the changes, fitting in with best practices for Universal Design for Learning. The peer support coordinator reviews the requests and, over the course of the next year, implements the suggested changes.

In addition to making the requested changes, she creates an assessment plan on her own to measure the impact of those changes, and reports the results back to the student team after the assessment has been completed. Though the group doesn’t bring up representation amongst student peer support staff, the coordinator also revises recruitment policies to increase access for BIPOC students to serve as peer support leaders, because she feels that diversifying her staff will also be helpful for the program. During the next hiring cycle, she begins requesting recommendations from faculty of students with strong interpersonal skills (in addition to knowledge in a certain content area), revisiting the minimum grade/GPA requirement to apply, and advertising the peer support role to BIPOC faculty, staff, and student groups.

Reflection questions:

How is this coordinator acting in solidarity with these students, or not? What ways could this situation have gone better?
What assumptions did the coordinator make in interpreting their concerns and potential action steps, particularly in terms of the assessment and recruiting changes that the group did not specifically request?
How might the coordinator create a practice that invites ongoing support and solidarity, rather than this one-time exchange?
How might your responses to the previous questions change if the student group included non-BIPOC accomplices?
How does your own positionality and experiences with solidarity impact your understanding and interpretation of the situation?

The following case study is based on an amalgamation of several actual occurrences at St. Olaf, but some of the particulars have been changed. As you read through the case study below, consider how the duration of the experience, the location, and the level of engagement may shape participation and affect relationships with community partners. Solidarity focuses on power and process and requires an intentional practice of building relationships grounded in trust around a shared goal or aspiration. The potential for building solidarity will vary according to phase, activity, purpose and the people involved.

As part of a student’s financial aid package, they may qualify to work off-campus in one of many paid Community Based Work Study (CBWS) positions. CBWS is an example of partnership between institutions of higher education and area nonprofits serving the public interest. Organizations benefit from the energy and dedication of college students, and the students gain valuable hands-on experience while serving the needs of the local community. CBWS positions are funded in unison by federal, state, university, and organizational dollars, and demonstrate an enduring and mutually beneficial community connection.

The local non-profit organization Neighbors in Hope (NIH) has offered CBWS positions to local college students for the past 7 years in their food and clothing resource programs; in addition, they regularly partner with the college in a number of different ways, including serving on the college’s community advisory council, hosting interns, and co-creating projects for community-engaged courses. NIH relies on the student workers to accomplish their mission of meeting the basic needs of the community and has developed practices to make the work study placement educational, enjoyable, and sustainable. At present, a 3rd year student majoring in Spanish and Religion has been approved for a second semester at NIH in the role of Bilingual Support Assistant. Their first semester in this role went well, and the student is getting more confident with the practices and policies of the organization. The agreement to extend the CBWS placement was based on increasing the time commitment to 10 hrs/wk, plus providing Spanish-language support at an upcoming community-wide Winter Weather Clothing Swap event that falls during a break in the academic calendar. The student has really enjoyed their placement and readily agrees with terms of a second semester.

A week before the Winter Weather Clothing Swap event, the student informs the site lead they will no longer be able to help out because they just accepted a last minute invitation to attend a national research symposium in Ohio with their Youth in Leadership Club. The symposium will be featuring the latest research findings regarding the integration of Latinx culture and religious practices into youth outreach efforts, which is exactly what this student is passionate about and believes it would be pivotal in their academic development. In CBWS, it’s understood that academics come first, and the site coordinator has been flexible with this student in the past to accommodate coverage when they requested time off to work on an assignment and when they needed to miss a shift for a group project. But this time, the team is counting on the student, particularly because they have developed trusted relationships with participants and had been encouraging clients to attend the event with assurance that there would be plenty of Spanish-language support available to assist them in selecting winter gear. When asked to reconsider, the student said they understand that there won’t be enough translators which means those families will have to wait extended times and might not get the winter gear they need but they’ll still get something. Later that day, the student was overheard talking to a fellow CBWS student on-site, saying, “What’s the big deal? I’m much more interested in a symposium than a clothing swap anyway.”

The NIH Program Director then sends the email below to the College Coordinator.

Good afternoon Work Study Coordinator,

We haven’t connected since the beginning of the semester but I wanted to reach out and get your insights into a dilemma we’re experiencing. One of our current students has just informed us that they’ll no longer be able to attend the Winter Weather Clothing Swap next week, which is one of our largest community events; and as you may recall, included in their agreement to be rehired. On average we serve about 500 local families at this event and it’s imperative that it runs smoothly. NIH will figure out how to fully staff the event, but I’m concerned this student is not considering the long-term impact on themselves, the community, and potentially even our partnership in CBWS.

I know everyone is doing their best and we all want this partnership to work, but this situation is deeply disappointing and frustrating for the NIH team. I’d like to talk about how we can make sure our priorities are in line to prevent this from happening in the future. With so much at stake, our first priority needs to be the health and well-being of the community. Can we find a time later this week to meet in person? I’d really appreciate your support in finding ways to repair this harm and move forward in our collaborative partnership.

Thank you ~ NIH Program Director

Subsequently, the College Coordinator sends the following email to the student.

Dear student, I’d like to meet with you as soon as possible regarding an email I received from your Community-Based Work Study site. Please make an appointment using my calendar link below. Thank you.

– – –

Reflection Questions

How are the players involved in this situation (student, NIH program director, college coordinator, clients) acting in solidarity with each other or not? What ways could this situation have gone better?
In the context of solidarity, how might you respond to the concerns and conflicting priorities of this situation as a college coordinator?
1. As a community site coordinator?
2. As a CBWS student?
How does the influence of monetary transactions impact your ability to act in solidarity as an institute of higher education:
1. With local organizations?
2. With student workers?
If solidarity is something that takes action over time toward a shared goal, what considerations need to be taken into account regarding the interaction of people moving in and out of the relationship?

As you read through the case study below, consider how the duration of the experience, the location, and the level of engagement may shape participation and affect relationships with community partners. Solidarity focuses on power and process and requires an intentional practice of building relationships grounded in trust around a shared goal or aspiration. The potential for building solidarity will vary according to phase, activity, purpose and the people involved.

St. Olaf has several faculty-led semester programs where courses are taught by resident instructors who are appointed by partner organizations. In addition to courses taught by partners, St. Olaf faculty design and teach a semester-length course to fulfill the OEP requirement under the new OLE core. St. Olaf is committed to partnering with organizations that have deep relationships with local experts and communities. One of St. Olaf’s program partners in Southern Africa integrates classroom learning with speakers, activities, and site visits.

Students participating in a faculty-led semester program are in-country for five weeks, attending a Social and Political Change in Southern Africa course taught by St. Olaf’s partner. The Academic Director and Site Director of the partner are both nationals and have deep ties with local organizations, academics, and civic leaders. The course is experiential in nature; site visits to NGOs and government offices as well as hosted speakers are integral to the learning objectives, and reflections are integrated to tie together themes and learning and to unpack experiences and impressions. Topics are weighty: genocide, poverty, gender violence, and colonialism. Students also meet with local organizers, educators, and civic leaders bringing about positive change. They are engaged and curious and are committed to grappling with difficult content.

While there, students struggle with what they perceive to be inaction of the group. A recent global event that negatively implicates the United States’ foreign policy practices has deeply impacted the group and they feel galvanized towards engaging more directly and actively. They are eager to be more involved or find ways to support the local organizations they have visited and ask their faculty and partners for opportunities to meet with people to learn more. To their St. Olaf faculty and each other, they voice concerns about being observers to the challenges faced by people rather than directly engaging.

Reflective Questions:

How is solidarity showing up in this situation?
How might you respond to these requests and concerns from students
1. As a faculty member?
2. As a community partner?
How does your positionality as a temporary visitor affect your ability to be in solidarity
1. with local organizations?
2. your hosts?
Can you say you are in solidarity with someone who does not want to be (or is not aware that they are) in solidarity with you?
Can you claim solidarity if you are not in communication with the people we are supposedly in solidarity with?
If proximity to location is not possible for practicing solidarity, what are other ways in which the group might find opportunities to be in solidarity?

More Modules

Faculty User’s Guide

Solidarity Module

Solidarity

And the Common Good

Introduction and Learning Objectives: Solidarity Module

Reflection Questions: Solidarity

Case Studies