The
volunteer sector, known in France as "le secteur de la solidarité,"
covers a wide range of activities, and although all participants provide
support to others, their motivations and beliefs are as diverse as
the organizations themselves.
Nonna
Mayer, CNRS Research Director and member of the "Centre d'études
de la vie politique française" ("Center for the study
of French political life," Cévipof), has coordinated a
report on the role of non-profit, charitable organizations, to study
how they restructure systems of altruism through individual involvement
and the social and political links this creates. Sophie Duchesne,
a CNRS researcher at the Maison Française d'Oxford, has analyzed
the forms altruism takes by studying Amnesty International activists
and volunteers with the "Restos du cœur," a French
soup kitchen.
Examination
of these organizations reveals that, although based on equality and
volunteering, they do not necessarily function with the unanimity
that might be expected. Ideological differences and two very different
approaches to voluntary activity affect the players.
The
members of Amnesty International constitute a homogenous group of
the qualified sector of the working population, with justifyist leanings,
while the volunteers of the Restos are a heterogeneous group, comprising
members of the non-working population. The mode of functioning within
the organizations accentuates the differences: at Amnesty, all actions
require certain skills and the more qualified members do not automatically
occupy responsible positions, while at the Restos, volunteers carry
out tasks according to their capabilities. The attitudes of those
involved vary accordingly. At Amnesty, subscription-paying members
elect people to posts of responsibility, and at the Restos, those
who hold responsibility do so because of their skills. The Resto volunteers
cannot influence the direction the organization takes.
At
Amnesty, members are motivated mainly by the cause, while at the Restos,
availability and the need to be useful are paramount. Amnesty International
clearly states that it is political, and involvement is hence political,
though non-partisan. Involvement at the Restos is far more time-consuming
than at Amnesty International. All volunteers agree, though, that
they gain much in terms of human relationships and a feeling of usefulness.
Nevertheless, this is not sufficient to explain the discrepancies
between expectations from their input and the actual results.
Perhaps
the meaning given to the word 'solidarity' can explain why volunteers
and activists continue. In the approach that underlies the Restos,
'solidarity' means making available some of what one has to those
who are deprived. This view goes hand in hand with an attitude that
does not aim at reforming society. The organization of the Restos,
which sustains the differences between the volunteers, endorses this
approach. Another conception of 'solidarity', centered on the notion
of sharing, is based on a universalistic vision of human nature. At
Amnesty, individual activists have to trust in the group. Although
the groups have little chance of freeing the prisoners they adopt,
their existence maintains the organization internationally, and this
attenuates, to a certain extent, abuses of human rights. Whether particularistic
or universalistic, these two visions of 'solidarity' stem from the
outlook of the players involved and from the way in which the organizations
operate.
