Critics of social injustice argue that the agent of transformative social change will (or should) be a mass agent; namely, an agent that is large, complex, and geographically dispersed. Traditional theories of collective agency emphasize the presence of shared intentions and common knowledge, but mass agents are too large for such cohesion. To make sense of mass agency, I suggest a new approach. On the solidarity theory of mass agency, a mass agent is composed of (a) organizers who intend to (...) fight for social change and (b) supporters who are in solidarity with organizers. (shrink)

This article discusses possible ways to account for how solidarity comes to be constituted. Beyond accounts tying solidarity either to identity, or to the adherence to a common normative framework, recent scholarship has underscored the role played by collective action in bringing about solidarity. In this paper, I agree that collective action has been often overlooked as a fundamental element in constituting solidarity but warn against the risk of conceptualizing the source of solidarity exclusively in terms of action. Instead, I (...) propose to understand solidarity as resulting from the continuous interaction between two different dimensions of solidarity: constitutive solidarity that centres on collective action, and constituted solidarity which centres on given identities. My paper begins by distinguishing the two meanings of solidarity – constituted and constitutive. The first referring to an (instituted) set of mutual obligations applying to a given group, the second referring to solidarity as underlying social bond, which establishes the solidarity group in the first place. The paper then goes on to discuss three different accounts of constitutive solidarity: identity-based, obligations-based and action-based. I argue that only the action-based account can conceptualise the coming about of new forms of solidarity and the changing scope of the solidarity group. Yet, such accounts are unable to conceptualise how constitutive solidarity can come to ground constituted forms of solidarity, able to endure through time. On this basis, I propose to interpret constitutive and constituted solidarity as two ‘moments’ of solidarity, one symbolically grounding the other, even if not through linear causation. Rather, constitutive solidarity is constantly evolving and constantly contributes to remap the identities depicting social reality, which ground constituted forms of solidarity. (shrink)

Emancipatory social movement solidarities are prefigurative associations. While pursuing broad-based social transformations, solidaristic agents attempt to model—in an incomplete and provisional way—the social relations they wish to bring into existence. Existing structures of domination, deep-set and overlapping as they are, pose an abiding challenge to the prefiguration of just relations, however. This article considers the challenge of prefiguration by developing a diachronic, goal-oriented, and epistemic account of solidarity. The author argues that solidarity is a collaborative process whereby agents prefigure relationships (...) of nondomination while working together to reach shared understandings about the political task at hand. The author examines two epistemologies that have not been traditionally connected to philosophical discussions of solidarity, philosophical hermeneutics and creolization, to elaborate the account. While both frameworks enable an understanding of solidarity as a properly transformative relation, creolization illuminates the possibilities and difficulties of collaborating under conditions of domination. (shrink)