The politics of solidarity

Ondertitel:solidarity frames and their significance

Recently, theorization and conceptualizations of solidarity have experienced a surge, as solidarity has become increasingly problematised. The challenges that solidarity faces today make it a contested and politicised concept. Consequently, it is fair to assume that solidarity has become predominant in current political discourses. This dissertation focuses on political parties as active evaluators and framers of solidarity who come into conflict, as they propose a different understanding of solidarity. Therefore, this dissertation introduces the concept of solidarity frames: rhetorical devices that specify a particular problem definition, a causal interpretation, a moral evaluation, and a treatment recommendation. We distinguish four solidarity frames - group-based, compassionate, exchange-based, and empathic solidarity – and their exclusionary counterparts. The main contribution of this dissertation is to further the understanding of the role of solidarity frames in the dimensionalization of the party political sphere. Based on the dialectical theory of solidarity, we propose a solidarity frame theory that theorises six dialectical relationships between the four solidarity frames. In addition, a dialectical approach also assumes the potential of exclusion and backlashes. We focus on the case of Belgium, more specifically the Flemish party system, to study solidarity frames in three aspects of party politics. First, we discuss the supply-side and assess the role of political parties in communicating and framing solidarity. We evaluate whether we can distinguish partisan discourses in solidarity frames more specifically by conducting a content analysis of party manifestos. Second, we turn to the demand-side of the party political sphere and assess whether voters have similar solidarity preferences as their preferred parties by conducting a survey. More particularly, we evaluate whether the solidarity frame preferences of party electorates are congruent with those of their preferred parties and assess the impact of solidarity frame preferences on propensities to vote for specific parties. Third, we conduct an intermediary analysis based on survey data that considers whether solidarity frames have a heuristic value for grassroots politicians functioning as the interface between the parties' supply and the voters' demands. First, our supply-side analyses indicated a higher prevalence of group-based and exchange-based solidarity among rightist parties, while leftist political parties strongly advocate compassionate and empathic solidarity. Moreover, we found that inverse elective affinities between group-based and empathic solidarity frames – in terms of salience – have grown stronger between 1995 and 2014. Our analyses also showed that one could distinguish the discourses from mainstream right parties and the populist radical right in terms of exclusionary versus inclusionary solidarity frames: the latter are more inclined to use exclusionary solidarity frames than the former. Second, our demand-side analyses indicated similar distinctions between solidarity frames - a higher degree of support for group-based and exchange-based solidarity among rightist electorates versus a higher degree of support for compassionate and empathic solidarity among leftist electorates. Furthermore, the results show that the choice between either bonding with those who are similar (i.e., group-based solidarity) or bridging the gulf with those who are different (i.e., empathic solidarity) has also become a pressing question for voters. Furthermore, we found that solidarity frame preferences significantly affect inclinations to vote for specific parties, even if we took left-right self-placement into account. Finally, our intermediary analysis found strong support for the hypothesis that solidarity frames are helpful for politicians to differentiate parties from one another. The results showed that such partisan stereotypes exist and are congruent with real discursive differences between party manifestos and differences between voter preferences. However, partisan and ideological biases affect how sharply politicians draw these distinctions between parties. Politicians tend to evaluate their parties and ideologically closer parties more favourably in terms of preferred solidarity frames. In conclusion, the recurrence of these solidarity conflict lines across datasets indicates that solidarity frames help make meaningful distinctions between parties and their voters. These recurring solidarity conflict lines indicate that a solidarity frame approach leads to similar findings as more conventional issue-based and value-based studies. However, our studies also indicate that the solidarity frame approach complements the more conventional approaches to the dimensionality of party politics. By measuring solidarity frames for the first time, this thesis enhances our understanding of the politics of solidarity and provides stepping stones for further research on this specific topic.

Jaar van publicatie:2022

Trefwoorden:Doctoral thesis

Toegankelijkheid:Open