Samstaða - What is Social Democracy III

Social democratic value terms:
Solidarity
Freedom and equality are both concepts which because of their complexity have interested political philosophers; a lot has been written on the meaning of the terms and on the relationship between the terms. The concept of solidarity has not interested political philosophy in the same way.

On the one hand there are many simple, almost slogan-like statements, expressing what solidarity is:
- Together we are strong,
- United we stand, divided we fall,
- Carry one anothers’ burden,
- All children are everyone’s children,
- Don’t touch my mate!

What these statements express is a sense of mutual belonging between people – a mutual belonging which at one and the same time focuses on our responsibility for one another and our dependency on one another. The word solidarity is related to the Latin term ”solidus”, which means compact, fixed, durable. In the early days of the labour movement solidarity was a question of holding together; society could be changed only through working together. No-one could do anything on his own about the unjust structure of power at that time, only together with others did one have the strength needed to do so.

But the demand to hold together, to support one another, was not only directed at the struggle for change, it was also directed at the changes that one wished to achieve. It was a question of holding together in the struggle for a better society and of sharing the gains from the struggle justly and equally. The struggle was aimed at winning common improvements, at a welfare which would cover everyone – it was not a question of individuals creating welfare for themselves by beating others in competition. The term solidarity is the practical expression of the insight which we wrote about in the section on equality, that all people as social beings have a mutual dependency on each other for their own individual welfare. And that the society functions best which has as its staring point in the good of all and that we all therefore have an interest in contributing to this common good.

Hospital care can be seen as a practical example of this. The right to good medical care, regardless of income, is a basic welfare demand. If it is to be a true right for all, we must – in solidarity – contribute jointly to financing it. It is a form of help from those in good health to those who are ill or injured, but it is at the same time a way of ensuring that one as an individual, will receive help, if and when one is struck by illness or by an accident. The solidaristic financing of the system provides security for individuals, and equality between individuals – but contributes also to a better society since we then avoid the social problems as well as the negative effects of reduced economic efficiency which follows in the wake of having a part of population lacking the resources to care for its health.

The link between solidarity and individual security also be seen in the system of social insurance. Families with children receive help through the tax system, paid for by all tax payers, including those who do not have children; and in this way we all contribute to creating better conditions for children. Gradually these children will also become tax payers who will contribute to the pensions for the older generation, including those who have not had children themselves; and in this way we all contribute to creating security for the elderly. This provides security for the individual at the same time as it creates a more secure society for all of us to live in.

But solidarity is much more than a collective self-interest. Just as with freedom and equality the concept of solidarity has a moral content as seen in some of the statements atthe opening of this section. Solidarity is also a question of our mutual responsibility forone another as expressed in the biblical demand ”carry one another’s burden”. In more everyday language it is a question of helping one another with difficulties and not leaving people struggling with problems to their fate. ”All children are everyone’s children” does not express a desire to remove from parents their special responsibilityfor their own children, more the fact that we have a responsibility to shape a society which gives all children good opportunities for development. The moral content of solidarity quite clearly has its roots in a Christian ethic; the parable of the Good Samaritan is a clear expression of the message of solidarity.

Today we use the concepts ”freedom, equality, solidarity” as social democratic value terms. But the original formula from the French revolution was ”freedom, equality, brotherhood”, where the term ”brotherhood” shows what the moral content of solidarity is: the mutual respect and support which is self-evident in the relationship between people who belong together. It was this idea which Per Albin Hansson (Social Democratic prime minister 1932-1946) expressed in his famous speech in the Riksdag in 1928, known as the ”people’s home speech”: ”The foundation of the home is togetherness and a feeling of belonging together. The good home does not allow for privileged and disadvantaged, no pets and no foster children. In such a home one does not look down on the other, no-one tries to win advantage at a cost to others, the strong does not repress or plunder the weak. In the good home there exists equality, care, co-operation. Applied to the larger people’s and citizens’ home this would entail the removal of all social and economic barriers which now separate citizens into privileged and disadvantaged, into ruling and dependent, into rich and poor, into wealthy and impoverished, plunderers and plundered.”

Solidarity does not exclude the individual effort to develop one’s own personal opportunities and needs. But it is in direct opposition to the egoism which allows the exploitation of others for personal advantage. In this sense solidarity is one of the preconditions for equality. For it is, in the final analysis, a feeling of brotherhood, of solidarity, which can persuade people to cooperate with one another and which can get the strong to refrain from using his strength to exploit the weak. At the same time it is only in an equal society that true solidarity is possible, since it is only in an equal society that it is not necessary to beat others in competition in order to survive oneself.

In this way these three value terms are interlinked. Freedom requires equality, equality requires solidarity and solidarity requires freedom and equality.