“Say It Loud, Say It Clear…”: Concerting Solidarity in the Canadian Refugees Welcome Movement (2015–2016)

Abstract

The Canadian Refugees Welcome Movement (2015-2016) was one of the most sizeable, visible, and effective instances of collective action in recent Canadian history. It had a nationwide scope and grassroots initiation. It comprised a wide variety of participants and actively employed social media in its constitution. This article reports the results of a multimethod case study that seeks to explain how collective action frames emerged in the context of the Canadian Refugees Welcome Movement; which actors were involved in their articulation; and how they generated a following, collective action and humanitarian and political effect. The focus is on the discursive processes of construction of solidarity across difference as they unfolded in the social media environment. The Facebook event pages calling for rallies in support of Syrian refugees, it argues, served as a discursive space that helped transform the moral shock experienced by members of distinct moral communities into a process of concerting of voices and construction of solidarity and collective action frames across differences. Résumé Le mouvement canadienne d'accueil des réfugiés (2015-2016) a été l'un des exemples d'action collective les plus importants, visibles et efficaces de l'histoire récente du Canada. Il avait une portée nationale et une initiation à la base. Il comprenait une grande variété de participants et utilisait activement les médias sociaux dans sa constitution. Cet article présente les résultats d'une étude de cas multi-méthodes qui cherche à The research presented in this article was supported by SSHRC Insight Grant 435-2014-0200.

Expedient, Affective, and Sustained Solidarities? Mediated Contestations of Islamophobia in the Case of Brexit, the Christchurch Terror Attack, and the COVID-19 Pandemic

“…(p. 868) Extending this principle, in this article, we resist narrow definitions of what constitutes digital solidarity and aim to think beyond hierarchies by instead attempting to understand the different dimensions of digital solidarity. Though definitions are heterogeneous, there is a general consensus that collectivity-informed by a politics of recognition-is central (see Bakardjieva, 2020). Kaarina Nikunen (2019, p. 3), for instance, defines solidarity as "the shared commitment to challenge injustice and social vulnerability."…”

“…An emphasis on collectivity should not be interpreted as similarity, as practices of solidarity necessarily operate across difference. It is in this context that the affordances of digital media platforms have emerged as particularly important, in allowing for differential, even "highly dispersed and individualized," constituents to coalesce (Gerbaudo, 2012, p. 5; see also Bakardjieva, 2020;Dean, 1996;Nikunen, 2019). In particular, the affective and networked dynamics of social media (Papacharissi, 2015), in combination with discursive content and practices, provides a context in which solidarities can be produced through complex socio-technical assemblages (De Blasio & Selva, 2019).…”

“…Extending this principle, in this article, we resist narrow definitions of what constitutes digital solidarity and aim to think beyond hierarchies by instead attempting to understand the different dimensions of digital solidarity. Though definitions are heterogeneous, there is a general consensus that collectivity—informed by a politics of recognition—is central (see Bakardjieva, 2020). Kaarina Nikunen (2019, p. 3), for instance, defines solidarity as “the shared commitment to challenge injustice and social vulnerability.” In this context, she argues, mediation has assumed a pivotal role as “media shapes, circulates and takes part in expressions and representations of solidarity” which may take the form of “media engagements, representations and productions that express or enhance solidarity” (Nikunen, 2019, p. 3).…”

“…Recognizing these critiques, Bakardjieva’s (2020, p. 646) analysis of Facebook use during a Canadian campaign to support refugees at the height of the 2015 European refugee “crisis,” elucidates how online discursive acts can still lead to the concerting of solidarity that results in collective political action. Applying Hund and Benford’s (2004) categories of internal and external solidarity (those we identify with versus solidarity with others), Bakardjieva (2020) demonstrates how emotion, cognition, and shared norms provided the motivational framework for action that bridged divides and translated into political action (albeit temporarily). This is not to conceal the considerable frictions that persisted, reflecting the diverse “moral imaginaries” (p. 647) of the participants, but these differences existed alongside the creation of new social bonds, due to the space for mutual recognition offered by Facebook.…”

“…There has been significant debate about what solidarity looks like and means in digital contexts (Fenton, 2008; Nikunen, 2019). While mediated solidarity can support coalition-building that works across difference (Bakardjieva, 2020), sustained modes of solidarity often jostle with more ephemeral forms of clicktivism (Stalder, 2013). Likewise, in the case of transnational solidarity work, mediated networks can “catalyse change,” but they can equally “reproduce power relations between West and global South” (Chouliaraki, 2013, p. 267).…”