Skip to main content

The Production of Solidarity: A Case Study of Voluntary School Programs of Hungarian Ethnic Kin Support

Abstract

The broader aim of this paper is to reveal how emotions of solidarity (“the urge to help”) are created and maintained in personal philanthropic relations. It will be shown that a dialectic of identification and othering plays an essential role in such processes. Qualitative analysis of such helping interactions may contribute to achieving a dual goal. First, as opposed to scholarly approaches that sweep all helping attitudes into the unitary category of a universal prosocial-altruistic disposition, the motivations and emotions that guide voluntary philanthropic actions may be understood as being embedded in a social-discursive context. Second, such helping interactions may contribute to understanding more deeply how ethical discourses and ideologies are (re)produced and maintained.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-658-01654-8_8
  • Chapter length: 25 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-658-01654-8
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

Notes

  1. 1.

    In the context of volunteering, a similar line of thought is followed by Kleres (2009).

  2. 2.

    Symbolic power in helping relations has been extensively studied by post-colonial and feminist analysts in terms of how different helping relations are oriented from the first world towards the third. These perspectives are devoted to showing how othering takes place during such helping activities, and taking a wider view, to showing how solidary relations, instead of emancipation, contribute to the maintenance of discourses of power and domination (Berlant 2004; Ahmed 2004; Woodward 2002).

  3. 3.

    Meaning construction is not a unilateral process. Although those in structurally and symbolically advantageous positions (i.e. helpers) have a greater influence on this, the recipients of help also have agency in shaping meanings, categories and boundaries. If participants—helpers and the helped—all share the goal of sustaining the helping interaction, then negotiations and strategic struggles that result in the shaping of meanings, relations and boundaries according to the multiple aims and expectations of participants will follow. In this paper I restrict my focus to helpers’ perspectives about such boundary-making in helping interactions.

  4. 4.

    See also Jasper (1998), who defines solidarity as an emotion itself, with features linked to the cognitive process of categorization.

  5. 5.

    Some important examples: Anderson (2006 [1983]), Eriksen (1993), Eriksen (1993) Calhoun (1997), Calhoun (2007).

  6. 6.

    3–7 days’ participant observation during the summer camps of each program.

  7. 7.

    Discourse is used in this paper in a Foucauldian sense as an interrelated system of statements (ideas and practices) and social positions in which the reproduction of knowledge and power are intimately inter-related (Foucault 1981).

  8. 8.

    Two major ways of understanding narratives are used in this paper: narratives may be ideal types of stories and ways of speech that appear in the actual speech acts of actors, as well as idealtypical statements that are constitutive elements of discourses.

  9. 9.

    Assimilation refers here to specific processes of inter- and intragenerational language change, intermarriage and inter-and intragenerational changes in national identification. With a special focus on related language use, see Fenyvesi (2005), especially Chaps. 4–6.

  10. 10.

    The process of civilisation is used by these authors in an Eliasian sense, referring to ”a movement upwards on the slope and in the qualitative level of social behaviour” (Melegh 2006, p. 20).

  11. 11.

    For ethnic Hungarians from Romania, see Feischmidt 2005; Kürti 2002.

  12. 12.

    ”The Republic of Hungary bears a sense of responsibility for the fate of Hungarians living outside its borders and shall promote and foster their relations with Hungary.” The Constitution of the Republic of Hungary, 6. §. “Bearing in mind that there is one single Hungarian nation that belongs together, Hungary shall bear responsibility for the fate of Hungarians living beyond its borders, and shall facilitate the survival and development of their communities; it shall support their efforts to preserve their Hungarian identity, the assertion of their individual and collective rights, the establishment of their community self-governments, and their prosperity in their native lands, and shall promote their cooperation with each other and with Hungary.” The Fundamental Law of Hungary, Foundations, Article D.

  13. 13.

    The largest such organisation (according to data about charitable 1 % donations of income tax permissible under Hungarian law) is a foundation that supports a children’s home institution that operates in settlements mainly based in Transylvania that is targeted primarily towards Hungarian children. The organisation is ranked 12th based on the total sum of money donated, and 18th according to the number of donors (9591 people). On 1 % income tax donations, see: Vajda and Kuti 2000.

  14. 14.

    According to a survey conducted in 2010, 28 % of all primary and secondary schools have some kind of institutional relationship with ethnic Hungarian schools and communities in neighbouring countries. (Lettner 2011).

  15. 15.

    Although the emphasis on this theme has changed through different governments, it has always remained part of the official National Core Curriculum. http://www.ofi.hu/english/publications.

  16. 16.

    On national socialisation in the institutional context of schools, see Brubaker et al. (2006, S. 270).

  17. 17.

    For policy actors, both from the Hungarian state and the Hungarian minority political sphere, these Hungarian speaking Roma are possible replacements for the minority Hungarian population that is decreasing due to migration and assimilation.

  18. 18.

    A region of Ukraine that shares a border with Hungary with a considerable ethnic Hungarian minority (A population of 156600, according to the 2001 census, Gyurgyík 2011).

  19. 19.

    March 15th, the 1948 Revolution and King Matthias are central symbols of the national historical canon in Hungary.

  20. 20.

    The program that targets Transcarpathian Roma communities relies on national discourses only indirectly. First, some of the volunteers that enter the program mobilise discourse on ethnic Hungarian minorities—while bracketing meanings around the Roma. Second, the program itself (i.e. practices and activities) borrows heavily from the Hungarian language camps that were organised earlier by the programme leader.

References

  • Ahmed, Sara. 2004. The Cultural Politics of Emotion. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Benedict. 2006 [1983]. Imagined Communities. London, New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayertz, Kurt. 1999 “Four Uses of Solidarity.” Pp. 3–28 in Solidarity, edited by Kurt Bayertz. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlant, Lauren. 2004. Compassion: The Culture and Politics of an Emotion. New York, London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boltanski, Luc. 1999. Distant Suffering, Morality, Media and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Brubaker, Rogers; Margit Feischmidt, Jon Fox, and Liana Grancea. 2006. Nationalist Politics and Everyday Ethnicity in a Transylvanian Town. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calhoun, Craig. 1997. Nationalism. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calhoun, Craig. 2007. Nations Matter: Citizenship, Solidarity, and the Cosmopolitan Dream. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, Candace. 1997. Misery and Company: Sympathy in Everyday Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Corry, Olaf. 2010. “Defining and Theorizing the Third Sector.” In Third Sector Research, edited by Rupert Taylor. New York, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, Londong: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, Emile. 1995 [1912]. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, Thomas Hylland. 1993. Ethnicity and Nationalism. Anthropological Perspectives. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —.1991. “The Cultural Contexts of Ethnic Differences”, Man 26(1):127–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feischmidt, Margit. 2005. “The Localization of Hungarian Discourses on Authenticity to Transylvania. Introduction.” (A magyar nacionalizmus autenticitás diskurzusainak szimbolikus térfoglalása Erdélyben). Pp. 5–28 in Deconstructing Transylvania (Erdély-(de)konstrukciók.), edited by Margit Feischmidt. Budapest: Ethnographic Museum, Budapest-Dep. of Communication and Media Studies University of Pécs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenyvesi, Anna. 2005. Hungarian Language Contact Outside Hungary: Studies in Hungarian as a Minority Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Flores, Ruben. 2013. “When Charity Does not Begin at Home: Exploring the British Socioeconomic Economy of Compassion.” Sociological Research Online 18(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, Michel. 1981. “The Order of Discourse.” Pp. 48–78 in Untying the Text: A Post-Structural Anthology, edited by Robert Young. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, Jon and Cynthia Miller-Idriss. 2008. “Everyday Nationhood.” Ethnicities 8(4):536–563.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Geertz, Clifford. 1973. “Ideology as a Cultural System.” Pp. 193–233 in The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilligan, Carol. 1982. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gingrich, Andre and Marcus Banks. 2006. Neo-Nationalism in Europe and Beyond: Perspectives From Social Anthropology. New York: Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, James. 2009, “Refugee Solidarity: Between National Shame and Global Outrage” Pp. 269–291 in Theorizing Emotions: Sociological Explorations and Applications, edited by Debra Hopkins, Jochen Kleres, Helena Flam and Helmut Kuzmics. Frankfurt, New York: Campus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gyurgyík, László. 2011. “Demographic Processes in Minority Hungarian Communities.” Pp. 468–479 in Minority Hungarian Communities in the Twentieth Century, edited by Nnándor Bárdi, Csilla Fedinec, and László Szarka. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halfpenny, Peter. 1999. “Economic and Sociological Theories of Individual Charitable Giving: Complementary or Contradictory?” Voluntas 10(3):197–215.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hochschild, Arlie. 1979. “Emotion Work, Feeling Rules, and Social Structure.” American Journal of Sociology 85(3):551–575.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Jasper, James M. 1998. “The Emotions of Protest: Affective and Reactive Emotions in and around Social Movements.” Sociological Forum 13(3):397–424.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kleres, Jochen. 2011. “Emotions and Narrative Analysis: A Methodological Approach.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 41(2):182–202.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • —. 2009. “Just Being There: Buddies and the Emotionality of Volunteerism.” Pp. 291–314 in Theorizing Emotions: Sociological Explorations and Applications, edited by Debra Hopkins, Jochen Kleres, Helena Flam, and Helmut Kuzmics. Frankfurt am Main, New York: Campus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kürti, László. 2002. The Remote Borderland: Transylvania in the Hungarian Imagination. New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lettner, Balázs. 2011. “1431 Institutions of Public Education on National Cohesion 1431 közoktatási intézmény a nemzeti összetartozásról.” in Határtalanul: nemzeti összetartozás az oktatásban, edited by Ö. Csete. Budapest: Apáczai Közalapítvány.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melegh, Attila. 2006. On the East/West Slope: Globalization, Nationalism, Racism and Discourses on Central and Eastern Europe. New York, Budapest: CEU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, David. 1995. On Nationality. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nándor, Bárdi. 2013. “Different Images of the Future of the Hungarian Communities in Neighbouring Countries, 1989-2012.” European Review 21(4):530–552.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Payton, Robert L. and Michael P. Moody. 2008. Understanding Philanthropy: Its Meaning and Mission. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pulcini, Elena. 2013. Care of the World: Fear, Responsibility and Justice in the Global Age. Dordrecht, Heidelberg, New York, Londong: Springer.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Schütz, Alfred. 1944. “The Stranger: An Essay in Social Psychology.” American Journal of Sociology (46)6:499–507.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Summers-Effler, Erika. 2006. “Ritual Theory.” Pp. 135–154 in The Handbook of the Sociology of Emotions, edited by Jan E. Stets and Jonathan H. Turner. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vajda, Ágnes and Éva Kuti. 2000. “Citizens' Votes for Nonprofit Activities.” In 1 %-Forint Votes” For Civil Society Organizations. Studies. Budapest: Research Project on Nonprofit Orgnizations. http://www.nonprofitkutatas.hu/letoltendo/1%25_English.pdf. Access Date: 09. January 2014.

  • Vidra Zsuzsanna and Jon Fox. 2012. The Radicalization of Media Discourse: The Rise of the Extreme Right in Hungary and the Roma Question. Budapest: CEU, Center for Policy Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walzer, Michael. 1983. Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, Kathleen. 2002. “Calculating Compassion.” Indiana Law Journal 77(2), Article 2. Online document: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol77/iss2/2 Access Date: 07. January 2014.

  • Zombory, Máté. 2012. Maps of Remembrance: Space, Belonging and Politics of Memory in Eastern Europe. Budapest: L’Harmattan, online document: http://www.harmattan.hu/book_downloads/Book_MateZombory_MapsOfRemembrance.pdf Access date: 14. April 2014.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research was carried out under the framework of the larger project “Changing Discourses of Nationhood” that was financed by the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund. I am indebted to Margit Feischmidt, the leader of this project, who extensively contributed to my research throughout the phases of planning, fieldwork and analysis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ildikó Zakariás .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zakariás, I. (2015). The Production of Solidarity: A Case Study of Voluntary School Programs of Hungarian Ethnic Kin Support. In: Kleres, J., Albrecht, Y. (eds) Die Ambivalenz der Gefühle. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-01654-8_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-01654-8_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-01653-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-01654-8

  • eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Science (German Language)