Active Solidarity: Intersectional Solidarity in Action

Abstract

While solidarity lies at the heart of collective action, it is not easily achieved. Social movements are characterized not only by difference within activist ranks but also by power asymmetries that reflect broader domination and distrust. The concept of intersectional solidarity is central to contemporary social justice movements’ efforts to negotiate these divisions, but how can it be achieved? To answer this question, we offer some guidelines for enacting intersectional solidarity, drawing on a theoretically grounded examination of three contemporary social movements in the United States and abroad (Occupy, Gezi Park, and the Women’s March).

Which Identity Frames Boost Support for and Mobilization in the #BlackLivesMatter Movement? An Experimental Test

“…As we have seen, the leaders of the Black Lives Matter movement adopted their intersectional messaging strategy in part because they believed that it would boost support for the movement in African American communities (Garza 2014;Jackson 2016). In recent years, feminist scholars of social movements have increasingly argued that we should expect higher rates of participation and greater capacity from racial justice movements that utilize intersectional frames (Brown et al 2017;Einwohner et al 2019;Ferree 2009;Lindsey 2015;Terriquez 2015). The findings from our survey experiment suggest that using gender or LGBTQ+ identity frames as the master frame for the Black Lives Matter movement does not mobilize any particular subgroup more, but does demobilize African American men.…”

“…Kimberlé Crenshaw, the progenitor of the term intersectionality, has recognized the "dilemma" that sometimes ensues when social movements have to choose between centering subgroup identities and pointing to unifying messages to mobilize the larger African American community (Crenshaw 1989, 148). These dilemmas have been recognized by others who have investigated intersectional social movements (Ayoub 2019;Einwohner et al 2019;Gershon et al 2019). The potential conflicts between subgroups that Crenshaw worried about are precisely the reason that most social movement scholars assert that promoting what Gamson (1992) calls a "collective identity" through master frames that downplay the internal diversity is the best way to mobilize adherents (Armstrong 2002;Hirsh 1990;Lichterman 1999;Polletta Which Identity Frames Boost Support for and Mobilization in the #BlackLivesMatter Movement?…”

Diverse social movement coalitions: Prospects and challenges

“…Thus, such coalitions may face a wide range of challenges including cultural and political differences (Lichterman, ; Smith & Bandy, ), divergent identity‐based motivations for taking action (Staggenborg, , ), different grievances and/or framings of the problem (Beamish & Luebbers, ), diverging tactical preferences (Rusch, ), resource inequalities and power asymmetries (Einwohner et al, ; Levi & Murphy, ), lack of overlap in membership (Staggenborg, , ), geographic distance (Smith & Bandy, ; Okamato, ), informal boundary policing (Maney, ), and particularly for transnational coalitions, limited opportunities to interact (Maney, ), and language differentials (Bandy & Smith, ). Consequently, trust is often an issue (Wood, ), to the degree that, in the words of Bystydzienski and Schacht (, p. 5), “even seemingly progressive individuals … [would] still typically view those individuals having the ‘other' identity with trepidation.”…”

“…This can be a difficulty for diverse coalitions, as a constructed identity that works with one audience may hurt the alliance's chance of success with another (Neuhouser, ). Not surprisingly then, participants (both organizations and individuals) often experience cross‐pressures (Einwohner et al, ). And organizations, at times, are forced to choose between their own organizational identity and that of the coalition's, which can come into conflict (Croteau & Hicks, ).…”

“…As the literature makes clear, power asymmetries and inequalities further complicate diverse alliances (Bystydzienski & Schacht, ; Cole & Luna, ; Einwohner et al, ). In coalitions, this can take the form of one or more organizational memberships holding more privileged positions than others or in some organizations having more resources than others (Dixon et al, ).…”