Introductıon

Historically, class struggle, identity, inequality, labor relations, and ideological disputes have been the main topics when discussing the idea of solidarity in the literature (^{O’Toole & Calvard, 2020}).

According to ^{Smith and Sorrell (2014)}, sociological theory has historically been inclined to simplify the complexity of human social experiences. They outline three main approaches: one that views social life as a competition between groups for power and prestige in contested arenas; another that sees individuals conforming to societal norms to fulfill the functional requirements necessary for the survival and proper operation of the social system; and a third that portrays humans as independent, logical decision-makers who weigh costs and benefits to maximize their personal advantage. The first and latter inherits to William ^{Sumner’s (2012)} believe that “we-groups” are solidary, while between the groups hostility prevails. For minorities, clanity can serve as an ethno-economic mechanism of survival, the costs of which are redeemed by the achieved in-group solidarity and support of a tribal team most successful in ethno-social selection (^{Popkov and Tiugashev, 2018}).

Various regions worldwide experience fluctuations in macrosocial or specific forms of solidarity. Some researchers define solidarity as the level of cohesion within or between groups, linking it to concepts such as integration, acceptance, and collective identity. Contemporary discourse applies the term "solidarity" to numerous contexts, including ethnic, labor, poverty-related, and global solidarity. Alternatively, it can be viewed as an ethical obligation to assist those facing adversity. Natural disasters and social crises often serve as powerful catalysts for solidarity movements.

As ^{Falcao & Le Menestrel (2022)} note, in a world with multiple centers of power, it is essential to think beyond simplistic models of unilateral control or collective struggles for liberation or conformity.

E. ^{Durkheim (1997)} already denounced the evil arising from the specialization of production, namely turning of person into an extension of a machine. As cultural improvement makes the narrow boundaries of specialization even more unbearable, it is impossible to mitigate or smooth this evil by general education or instilling in workers interest in art and literature. Durkheim, considering solidarity as the highest universal value recognized by all members of society, regarded consistency of their functions with their abilities and inclinations as important condition for workers’ solidarity.

P. ^{Lavrov (1965)} developed this idea postulating the right and the obligation of an individual to strive to change the existing society in accordance with own moral ideals, to fight for progress, with constantly reconsidering ethical ideas on progress. Both authors, identifying themselves with empirics and positivists, laid their main stress on ethical issues of solidarity.

Organizations, including businesses, should encourage diverse perspectives and discussions. Executives need to evaluate their company's environment from various angles. The reality of a multipolar world has become apparent after years of believing in a single-power system. We must question why we failed to foresee, tackle, or reduce the numerous challenges we now face. Corporations should adapt to this new landscape by promoting multifaceted dialogues and peaceful consolidation. Leaders must assess their organizational climate and consider different viewpoints (^{Falcao & Le Menestrel, 2022}). In a multipolar context, embracing unity involves being receptive to contrasting or alternative opinions, sincerely accepting and growing from them, and supporting efforts to reach mutually beneficial outcomes.

Perspective on Solidarity

Considering the emerging new order shaped by conflicts increasing across the globe and remaking crucial political and trading blocks that affect societies infiltrated by separatism, we can no longer view solidarity through traditional approach. We should theorize solidarity from various positions, showing what longer-term factors underlie the construction of the new solidarity theory, and suggest the insights that solidarity studies and practices need under this new world order.

Solidarity is present in different topics such as conceptualizations of solidarity in social sciences, empirical studies of solidarity, inclusion/exclusion, social cohesion, women entrepreneurship (^{Simba et al., 2023}), food security (^{Jers et al., 2023}) and the common good, solidarity in management and economics studies (social innovation, social entrepreneurship, cooperatives, orange economy, indigenous entrepreneurship), politics, public policies, human rights, and social justice, allyship, coalitions, social movements, and most important, non-Western conceptualizations of solidarity, which ^{Zheng calls “a solidarity from below” (Zheng, 2023}).

Solidarity, a fundamental tenet of interpersonal relationships and enduring commitment, is in danger because of the prevalent consumer lifestyle in the postmodern era, which fosters consumerism (^{Bauman 2007}: 135-136).

These trends are also evident in academia, where the solidarity principle is one of the core tenets of academic ethics and should be represented in the framework and guidelines of academic ethics (conduct) codes (^{Bieliauskaitė, 2021}). By most measures, highly educated people are less likely to support redistribution because they tend to lose more and gain less. Using data from the European Social Survey, ^{Gelepithis, and Giani (2022)}. presented a case in which, regardless of the improved material conditions it is linked to, university education significantly lowers support for redistribution. While universities support a variety of progressive viewpoints on cultural tolerance, they also support conservative redistribution preferences, which are supported, although not entirely explained, by the financial stability that they typically offer. To put it briefly, European universities both promote and undermine cultural inclusivity and economic solidarity ideals (^{Gelepithis & Giani, 2022}).

Alienation in forms of the meaninglessness of existence and social isolation pushes people to activism, participation in political and social movements (^{Brouchić, 2023}). This may explainw the early industrial movements of the Luddites and the uprising of weavers, which later transformed into trade unions and labor associations.

Industrial society has lost the cementing power of collective religious consciousness. Labor division breeds the desired social connection, group solidarity, and compensating for individuals associated with narrow specializations. Successful professional associations, in addition to solving strictly professional problems, foster a sense of labor solidarity among their members, and protect their personal and group interests.

Considering the gig economy's new dimensions, which combine contingent labor with a digital environment that atomizes and de-spatializes the workforce, it is important to address the implications for solidarity and mutual aid. Insofar as identifying with other members of the same group is a prerequisite for reciprocal caring, and hence, mutual aid and worker solidarity are possibly even more important than the dialectic of class struggle to a sense of class (^{Abbeele, 2022}).

Social connections, engagement, networks, organizations, and, to a lesser degree, an inventive context and solidarity, are to date the most significant factors of social innovations in poverty and non-poverty (^{Millard & Fucci, 2023}). An inquiry into how and to what degree inclusive business and solidarity economy approaches might help remove obstacles to the beneficial effects of certification on farmers’ livelihoods (^{Oberlack et al., 2023}) is becoming increasingly relevant.

Owing to its significant effects on biodiversity and global warming as well as the numerous negative externalities it generates, the normal economic model is not sustainable. Additionally, it is unsustainable because of the disparities it perpetuates, which erode the fundamental tenets of democracy. However, these two unsustainable factors are combined. Another management revolution is required to handle these problems; one that relies on solidarity as a vital remedy. In fact, solidarity management fosters a different reality, in which the natural world defies the strongest law and develops on its own through cooperation and shared resources (^{Eynaud & Carvalho de França Filho, 2023a}). Ideas about solidarity, reciprocity, camaraderie, and trust are expected to advance the understanding of community-based financing in developing countries (^{Simba et al., 2023}).

Discussion

In non-English-speaking nations (^{Geiger & Gross, 2024}), in which solidarity is more than just charity, interpretations of solidarity-based leadership undoubtedly necessitates a return to economic underpinnings. Burnham's description of the managerial revolution presumably combined political, economic, and technical aspects into one strategy. Management strategists need to take things a step further and take a sociological turn at the start of the twenty-first century. As a result, they can alter conventional wisdom and support the development of an organizational philosophy that emphasizes unity, such as the recent call for global solidarity focusing on the pharmaceutical industry.

It is possible to write a counterhistory and adopt new perspectives to examine cooperatives, mutualist societies, partnerships, and other modes of struggle with imperialism by rediscovering solidarist writers (^{Eynaud and Carvalho de França Filho, 2023b}).

According to ^{Eynaud and Carvalho de França Filho (2023c}), organizational studies can be reconsidered using Polanyi's conceptual framework. This author refers to the desire to reduce the economy to a market economy as an economic error, which he condemns. The dominance of market logic has several disadvantages. In addition to hiding other economic logics, such as reciprocity, redistribution, and domestic sharing, it tends to turn labor, money, and nature into commodities. The idea of a substantive economy suggests collecting and accounting for how dependent humans are on the natural world and other people to survive.

For example, employee solidarity behavior (SB) is crucial for creating a feeling of community among businesses, especially during times of crisis when unfavorable working conditions are prevalent (^{Prouska et al., 2023}), thus creating an organizational solidarity culture (^{Fremeaux et al., 2023}). Even in migrant groups coexisting in shared living and working spaces (^{Ma, 2023}), Syrian refugee entrepreneurs benefited from the solidarity of Egyptians who offered different types of support to help them (^{Soliman et al., 2023}).

Solidarity is undoubtedly the basis for society’s self-organizing potential. The research project of Russian Science Foundation “Solidary Society: from Discursive Analysis to Social Practice” developed by the authors of this article examines the ways and means to substantiate principles and build non-violent model of solidarity for contemporary society starting from micro-level of society up to macro-level, utilizing civil society resources, building value basis of solidarism (^{Sirazetdinova, 2024}), and incorporation of value attitudes into the system of education and moral upbringing of the younger generation.

This special issue presents different perspectives on today’s concerns regarding solidarity. Associations between mental health, intergenerational solidarity and academic performance of university students (^{Nassri Vargas et al, 2024}), or familial solidarity of femicide victims impact their mental health issues (^{Rocha Vazquez & Ramírez Martinez, 2024}), Cases relevant with regard to claims that in Eastern Europe, people is tired from political debates and almost nobody believes in any other values than individualistic liberty, particular good and familial solidarity (^{Dobra, 2022}: 30).

The nature and content of solidarity practices remain relevant research questions for wars, disasters, emergency situations, and the uprising of nationalism (^{Kurt, 2016}). Intensifying structural and societal transformations on a global scale affects the direction of scientific research. In this line, ^{Jimenez Terrazas et al (2025)} described the experience of digital and educational solidarity from an artificial intelligence center (IA Center State of Chihuahua).

^{Calderón-Martínez and Peláez-Higuera (2024)} give several insights to essential mission of university in building solidarity ties by fostering social, economic and ecological development via encouraging and training in fields of entrepreneurship and social projection. Today, solidarity is regarded as the third generation of human rights “which seek collective protection of group rights’ (^{Igonoh, 2020}, p. 30), and Pelly and ^{Abisoye (2025)} explored the possibility of bridging professional and gender solidarity through organizational storytelling.

In addition, ^{Canales García et al. (2025)} analyzed the altruistic solidarity of social entrepreneurs in the context of building knowledge networks, and ^{Bojorquez Carrillo (2024)} continued the theme of social and solidarity economy with a bibliometric analysis of recent Web of Science research publications.

The results of the abovementioned investigations confirm that morality and solidarity are collective in nature (^{Bykov, 2019}) and unique to each group or society. The grounds for consolidation as a social technology for gathering collective efforts are not only shared ideals but also deliberate shared interests of communities and groups.

Following the sociocultural approach, solidarity changes within society. In this genuinely interdisciplinary special issue, ^{Mangone (2024)} suggests the theoretical foundations of the concept of solidarity, emphasizing the interplay of personal choice and belonging to communities and groups in the process of solidarization.

Conclusion

We firmly believe that, in the current context, the distinction between solidarity interpretations according to the formal criteria of separate social sectors became overly conditional. The disciplinary and professional affiliations of solidarity researchers were originally fairly wide: social psychology, geography, jurisprudence, history, economics, and political theory. Having broad research interests, the first theorists of solidarity never limited their understanding of solidarity to certain movements or types. To make progress towards social consolidation, advance regional security, and promote values of cooperation among the international community, scholars examine the scientific legacy of solidarity studies.

Drawing from scholarly literature and greeting the variety of approaches, we do not confine solidarity to the only definition, bearing in mind that all types of solidarity are based on collective agency and empathic joining, and match the issues of private freedom and belonging to a community with unique values. We make a call to firmly believe that to develop theoretical or working non-violent models of social solidarization and consolidation, solidarity studies should identify the similarities and differences between idealist and utilitarian treatments existing in theories and regulations worldwide.