Solidarity is necessary

In less developed countries or regions, individuals come together in supportive communities, which are the conditions for survival. We share, to a certain extent, wealth and rationalize the use of essential resources such as water. We carry out voluntary work that benefits the entire community, we give a helping hand to those in difficulty... This form of solidarity which is part of the culture and of "living together" is accepted because without it, the very existence of each individual would be called into question.

But as societies develop and individuals see their standard of living rise, we are witnessing a paradoxical movement: disolidarization.

This phenomenon is particularly visible in European countries: since everyone's condition improves and everyone is self-sufficient, solidarity is less necessary and is beginning to disappear. Gestures of solidarity are becoming rarer and rarer and are becoming the exception. Solidarity is disappearing from culture.

It is disappearing all the more rapidly as individual solidarity is being replaced by a welfare state which, by redistributing wealth through public mechanisms, by pooling risks through health insurance or retirement schemes, removes the responsibility from individuals who no longer consider themselves bound to solidarity.

When this solidarity disappears, it seems to leave people's mentalities quite definitively, to the point that in times of crisis, such as the one Europe is currently experiencing, individuals feel demeaned when they have to call upon solidarity. This is the case, for example, of young professionals who were victims of redundancy plans following the 2008 crisis and who were forced to return to live with their parents. They live as a failure and as an injustice to have to postpone their plans for independence. Before 2008, they were planning to borrow to buy a family apartment at an astronomical price that would have put them in debt over 20 or 25 years. Since 2008, they can no longer afford to rent an apartment and some of them have to return to their parents. Supreme failure in an individualistic society. And yet, only a century ago, in an essentially rural Europe, newlyweds often settled on the family farm which they were later to take over and lived with their parents. Living with one's parents was not a failure. A large proportion of the new poor in Europe are single-parent families composed of young divorced women who are raising children alone and who are poor mainly because they have to pay rent alone. They often "fell" into poverty when they got divorced and stopped enjoying the most basic form of solidarity: marriage, in which spouses pool their resources to live and survive. Prior to divorce, these women only have to pay "half rent", half a car, half an electricity bill, and have a disposable income on the side that allows them to support the family. After the divorce, they lose a great deal in material terms.

There are no judgements to be made about these behaviours, but in Mediterranean countries, where family solidarity is still anchored in morals, these choices seem curious.

Nevertheless, it can be observed that, almost everywhere in the world, solidarity is generally becoming less and less natural.

This is unfortunate because, whether we like it or not, we are all dependent on one another insofar as we all live in the same society. The word "society" should be considered in its broadest sense: our community, our country, our continent and even our planet, because we know that in the era of globalization, we have all become citizens of the world. The proof of this is the financial crisis of a small country of 13 million people like Greece (0.19% of the world's population and 0.54% of the world's GDP) that has affected the entire global economy.

I believe that solidarity is therefore necessary, and it is up to each person to decide how he or she wants to show their sense of solidarity: with their family, with their friends, with their colleagues, with associations, with their city, in the form of financial donations, in the form of time donations, in the form of one-off aid?
Incidentally, on a personal basis, I think that acts of solidarity should be discreet.

It is up to each one to choose.