Written by Dr. Jae-Eun Noh, Research Fellow, ACU.
I receive emails almost every day, inviting me to sign a petition or join a campaign “in solidarity.” In many ways, I’m grateful that I get to learn what’s happening around the world and how people are resisting injustice. Clicking “yes” to a petition, sharing information, or adding a campaign logo to my social media profile gives me a brief but reassuring sense of contributing to the well-being of distant others, all within a couple of minutes.
I think of this as “instant solidarity”—quick, easy, and largely effortless, much like instant food. And just like instant food, instant solidarity has its place. It lowers the barriers to engagement, making it more convenient and accessible for people to participate. But while it is helpful, its capacity to bring about real, lasting change may be limited.
In November 2024, I had the privilege of helping organise a workshop titled “Exploring and Enabling Theories and Practices of Solidarity and Adjacent Concepts in Australia, Aotearoa New Zealand, and the Wider Pacific.” A follow-up webinar was held in April 2025. Across both events, one theme that stood out was the foundation of solidarity itself.
Solidarity, it was suggested, involves recognising similarities or shared connections in spite of surface-level differences. These similarities might include shared identities, vulnerabilities, struggles, or goals. Such recognition invites us to respond to others’ suffering with empathy and compassion, and to act accordingly.
But we can also stretch our understanding of relatedness. Associate Professor Krushil Watene’s talk on Māori perspectives of relationality challenged us to broaden our concept of “us,” extending it to include ancestors, future generations, and even non-human nature. This more inclusive vision of relationship encourages us to take responsibility not only for our own flourishing, but for the collective flourishing of the whole.
It left me with an important question: if the degree of relatedness and urgency varies from situation to situation, how do these differences shape how ‘solid’ our solidarity really is?
As Professor Barbara Prainsack reflected during the webinar, “Similarity in a relevant respect can give rise to solidarity… the key thing about solidarity is that, in light of our differences, we build upon what we have in common if we attend to these connections rather than the differences.”
Dame Catherine Healy’s talk on sex worker solidarity powerfully illustrated this. She showed how people from diverse backgrounds could stand together around shared experiences of poor labour practices, even while acknowledging their differences. Her insights also raised the topic of “allyship,” which some critique for reinforcing an “us and them” mentality (see Emma Dabiri) When difference is emphasised too much, solidarity can slip into something more akin to charity—an unequal relationship between ‘rescuer’ and ‘rescuee’. As the webinar also highlighted, the very boundaries we draw around similarity and relatedness can, at times, become mechanisms for othering.
“Solid solidarity” demands deeper engagement. It calls for a commitment to building relationships that resist othering. As Professor Angela Ballantyne noted, trust and solidaristic relationships aren’t built overnight. They require time and effort, much like preparing a proper meal that truly nourishes those who eat it. In global health, the push for efficiency and measurable outcomes has sometimes compromised people’s dignity and sovereignty. In some instances, people have had to prove their vulnerability in order to access the care they need, and that isn’t what true solidarity looks like.
These deeper, more authentic encounters are not always comfortable. They can demand the sharing or even the surrendering of resources, access, privilege, or power. Associate Professor Bridget Pratt, who led the organisation of both the workshop and webinar, reminded us that we must navigate contradictions and differences in a world with multiple realities. She quoted one participant’s reflection: “Deep solidarity occurs in these moments of mutual contradiction, with their opportunities for transformation.”
Reflecting on this, I can see how my own “instant solidarity” mostly satisfied my personal desire to do something, but without demanding too much from me. Yet it was a beginning. It helped me notice who I feel connected to and why. This recognition, I believe, can be the starting point for moving toward a “solid and deep” solidarity—one that involves both meaningful recognition and sustained action.