Solidarism as a Political Philosophy of Moderation in the Works of G.K. Gins

Abstract

The article aims to reconstruct the political-philosophical content of G.K. Gins’s concept of solidarism and to determine its heuristic potential for analyzing contemporary political conflicts and social polarization. The working hypothesis is that Gins’s solidarism is not an intermediate compromise among liberalism, conservatism, and socialism, but an autonomous normative-political model for reconciling the interests of the individual, society, and the state. The methodological framework combines content analysis of Gins’s texts, discourse analysis of key concepts in his political language (including solidarism and solidarity), and elements of a comparative approach that juxtapose solidarism with competing ideological traditions. The study concludes that its theoretical contribution lies in advancing a scholarly interpretation of Gins’s solidarism as an evolutionary model of political moderation in which the state functions not only as an institution of coercion – without excluding coercion when justified – but also as a mechanism of normative coordination that channels social energy toward consensus and the reproduction of solidarity. The approach’s key novelty is shown to lie in overcoming the crisis of «guiding ideas» through an ethically oriented political framework in which material progress is conceptually aligned with moral unity, and individual freedom with the common good. Scientifically, this comparison expands the analytical toolkit for polarization research by treating moderation and solidarism as an alternative to dualistic models of political conflict that tend to foster radicalization. Practically, the findings can inform strategies for de-escalating ideological confrontation and strengthening consensual mechanisms in society.