"Latinx Catholics have used Our Lady of Guadalupe as a symbol in democratic campaigns ranging from the United Farm Workers movement to the Chicano movement to the movement for just immigration reform. In diverse ways, these groups use Guadalupe's symbol and narrative to make claims about justice in society's basic structures (law, policy, institutions, for example) while seeking to generate greater participation and representation in US democracy. Yet, Guadalupe is illegible within a liberal political framework that seeks to protect society's basic structures from religious encroachment by relegating religious speech, practices, and symbols to the realm of the background culture. In response to this problem, religious ethicists have argued for expansions of the liberal framework that would make religious language, arguments, and practices communities legible within a pluralistic society without capitulating to anti-democratic modes of governance that undermine pluralism. What remains unexplored is the way that the aesthetic dimensions of particular religious traditions can be engaged toward cultivating a more participatory democracy that invites substantive contributions to society's common life from religious people and communities. Instead, in conversation with political liberalism, Latinx theological aesthetics, and Catholic social thought, The Aesthetics of Solidarity examines the use of particular religious symbols to make democratic claims and generate greater participation and presence in the life of US democracy. After evaluating liberalism's capacity for constructive engagement with religion toward strengthening democratic participation, the project employs Latinx theological aesthetics and Catholic social thought to offer a constructive framework for interpreting religious symbols in the context of a religiously pluralistic and participatory democratic life"--

A political sociologist examines the concept of universal, egalitarian citizenship and assesses the prospects for developing democratic solidarity at the global level.

The twenty-first century has seen major challenges to freedom and democracy. Authoritarianism is on the rise and democracy is in retreat. Some promote individualism and markets as the solution to almost every problem. On the other side there are those who champion collectivism and full public ownership. Neither side is convincing. Unrestrained capitalism has exacerbated inequality. Socialism in practice has ended democracy. Effective defenders of liberty and human flourishing must find a different course. This book argues for a pragmatic, social democratic liberalism that avoids unrealistic extremes and tackles major problems such as inequality and climate change.

How did the fall of communism and the subsequent transition to capitalism in Eastern Europe affect the people who experienced it? And how did their anger affect the quality of the democratic systems that have emerged? Poland offers a particularly provocative case, for it was here where workers most famously seemed to have won, thanks to the role of the Solidarity trade union. And yet, within a few short years, they had clearly lost. An oppressive communist regime gave way to a capitalist society that embraced economic and political inequality, leaving many workers frustrated and angry. Their leaders first ignored them, then began to fear them, and finally tried to marginalize them. In turn, workers rejected their liberal leaders, opening the way for right-wing nationalists to take control of Solidarity. Ost tells a fascinating story about the evolution of postcommunist society in Eastern Europe. Informed by years of fieldwork in Polish factory towns, scores of interviews with workers, labor activists, and politicians, and an exhaustive reading of primary sources, his new book gives voice to those who have not been heard. But even more, Ost proposes a novel theory about the role of anger in politics to show why such voices matter, and how they profoundly affect political outcomes. Drawing on Poland's experiences, Ost describes lessons relevant to democratization throughout Eastern Europe and to democratic theory in general.

Democracy has become disentangled from our ordinary lives. Mere cooperation or ethical consumption now often stand in for a robust concept of solidarity that structures the entirety of sociality and forms the basis of democratic culture. How did democracy become something that is done only at ballot boxes and what role can solidarity play in reviving it? In Solidarity in Conflict, Rochelle DuFord presents a theory of solidarity fit for developing democratic life and a complementary theory of democracy that emerges from a society typified by solidarity. DuFord argues that solidarity is best understood as a set of relations, one agonistic and one antagonistic: the solidarity groups' internal organization and its interactions with the broader world. Such a picture of solidarity develops through careful consideration of the conflicts endemic to social relations and solidarity organizations. Examining Men's Rights groups, labor organizing's role in recognitional protections for LGBTQ members of society, and the debate over trans inclusion in feminist praxis, DuFord explores how conflict, in these contexts, becomes the locus of solidarity's democratic functions and thereby critiques democratic theorizing for having become either overly idealized or overly focused on building and maintaining stability. Working in the tradition of the Frankfurt school, DuFord makes a provocative case that the conflict generated by solidarity organizations can address a variety of forms of domination, oppression, and exploitation while building a democratic society.

In a broad critique of contempororary radical political theory, Joseph Schwartz imagines a feasible, progressive, majoritarian, global politics in a post-industrial world. What would it look like, and how could we get there?

Traditional economics is built on the assumption of self-interested individuals seeking to maximize personal gain. This is far from the whole story, however: sharing, caring and a desire to uphold the collective good are also powerful individual motives. In a world wracked by inequality, social divisions, and ecological destruction, can we build an alternative economics based on our mutual co-operation? In this book Chris Benner and Manuel Pastor invite us to imagine and create a new sort of solidarity economics – an approach grounded in our instincts for connection and community – and in so doing, actually build a more robust, sustainable, and equitable economy. They argue that our current economy is already deeply dependent on mutuality, but that the inequality and fragmentation created by the status quo undermines this mutuality and with it our economic wellbeing. They outline the theoretical framing, policy agenda, and social movements we need to revive solidarity and apply it to whole societies. Solidarity Economics is an essential read for anyone who longs for an economy that can generate prosperity, provide for all, and preserve the planet.