Solidarity – A more mature outlook than loyalty
Europe, 2025-10-10
I was teaching in a school recently and during the topic ’frendship’, the concept of loyalty came up. My co-teacher and most of the students agreed on that it is one of the most important concepts in relations.
As a clarification, this Eastern European country is very rural and conservative, to the point of even having a good proportion of not only conservatism but reactionism.
Since I have personally never really put too much value in loyalty, but on the other hand seen solidarity as a very important principle, I started to think.
Loyalty: the quality of being constant in your support of somebody/something
Solidarity: support by one person or group of people for another because they share feelings, opinions, aims, etc.
Source: Oxford Adanced Learners Dictionary
In-group vs. out-group thinking
In social psychology and sociology, an in-group is a social group to which a person psychologically identifies as being a member. By contrast, an out-group is a social group with which an individual does not identify.
In neurology, there is an established literature about the innate propensity of the human brain to divide the world into us and them valence categories, where the exact membership of the in-group and out-group are socially contingent, and the intensity exists along a spectrum from mild to complete dehumanization of the "othered" group.
Source:Wikipedia [1]
Loyalty vs. solidarity
There are three points to make when you compare loyalty to solidarity. Of course, there are more, but this introduction to the comparison will focus on these.
Loyalty is relational, solidarity is moral or ideological.
- Loyalty is based on who you're tied to, be it a group, a leader, a nation, or a family. It’s based on a relationship, not necessarily whether they’re doing something just or fair.
- Solidarity is based on what you believe is right. You might show solidarity with people you’ve never met, simply because they’re being treated unfairly.
A current example of consequences of loyalty can be found in the MAGA movement in the US, in the 2020s. It shows how loyalty can override facts, law, or ethical principles, especially when it’s directed toward a leader or identity group.
Many followers remain loyal to Donald Trump regardless of court rulings, evidence, or norms, even when those go against democratic principles. This loyalty is tied more to ingroup identity and emotional allegiance than to objective standards or universal values.
By contrast, someone showing solidarity might stand with marginalised voters or election workers because they believe in fair elections or the rule of law, and this even if that means criticising their own side.
Loyalty demands obedience, solidarity invites mutual support.
- Loyalty often asks: “Will you stand by us no matter what?” It can demand submission to the group or leader, even if they act wrongly.
- Solidarity asks: “Will you support what's right, even if it's hard?” It’s more about shared struggles or resistance.
To use the MAGA movement as an example again, even if historically there are many other examples, John Bolton was once an esteemed member of the inner circle of the movement. He was generally aligned with many conservative policies.
When he criticised Trump and published his book, he was not denounced for his beliefs but for his disloyalty to the leader. He wasn’t kicked out for switching sides politically but rejected for breaking ranks.
This shows that in Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA [2]), loyalty often matters more than truth or shared values. It’s about staying in line.
On the other hand, solidarity would allow for principled disagreement, even among allies, if someone is standing up for truth or justice.
Loyalty often reinforces hierarchy, solidarity often resists it.
- Loyalty usually flows upward, to a leader, a flag, a party. It supports top-down structures and obedience.
- Solidarity is horizontal, people standing with others, often against power structures.
Loyalty tend to foster in-group thinking, which is known to lessen empathy with percieved out-groups.
There can even be ”internal in-groups”, especially in hierarchical structures and with stronger Social dominance orientation (SDO [3]). If an out-group is ”defeated”, members of an internal distinction, that previously were an unquestion part of the group, suddenly become the new out-group.
Footnotes
1 Wikipedia article: In-group and out-group, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-group_and_out-group
2 Wikipedia article: Right-wing authoritarianism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_authoritarianism
3 Wikipedia article: Social dominance orientation, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_dominance_orientation