Organic and Mechanical Solidarity in Maganda Magazine

According to Emile Durkheim, mechanical solidarity is based on the likeness and a collective consciousness between individuals in a society (39). The common consciousness is described as a system of common beliefs and understanding of various aspects of a society. When the collective consciousness is damaged by an individual, the society must work to repair the damage done to the common consciousness through penal codes, or repressive law (39). In order for repressive law, or punishment to effectively restore the collective consciousness, it must be: (1) passionate, where the society is able to direct its revenge on the damage (48), (2) public, where society collectively sees the criminal act as a wrong (50), and (3) organized by the courts and magistrate so that it is clearly understood by the collective society what the consequences are of crime. Durkheim associates mechanical solidarity with repressive laws because he sees them operating in a mechanical or automatic way where “punishment is therefore established with a kind of mechanical spontaneity” (57).
On the other hand, organic solidarity is achieved through having complementary differences in a society and is the more likely form of solidarity under a society with an increasing amount of division of labor (70). This solidarity is measured through restitutive laws that are in place in order to restore the relationships built under the division of labor (68). The difference between organic solidarity and mechanical solidarity is that the former does not operate on punishment. Rather, because the dominating form of consciousness in this society is an individualistic one, restoring the common consciousness through punishment is seen as unnecessary (71).
The institution which I chose to study, Maganda Magazine, a student-run literary/arts publication and organization on campus operates with both mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity. When individuals apply to be on the staff of Maganda, there is the unwritten understanding that their individual actions (or inactions) will affect the entire staff and how society perceives the organization as a whole. On that note, if anyone does not abide by this unwritten understanding—for example, if someone was to damage the collective consciousness by stepping back from their position and responsibilities, then consequences would follow in a both a mechanical and organic way.
Since we as a staff assume that everyone has an emotional investment in the growth of the publication and arts organization, it does damage to our consciousness and emotions if we saw that someone was not as emotionally invested in the organization as everyone else is. Secondly, we would have to make it public (at least within staff) that this is an issue that needs to be handled. Lastly, we would have to solve it in an organized fashion, whether that is transferring the responsibilities from the person who stepped back to other people on staff, or collectively figuring out how this person is still accountable to the organization.
Taking this same example and looking at through an organic solidarity lens, it also necessary to restore the relationships under the division of labor. As mentioned above, staff would have to figure out how to divide the labor of person who decided to step down from their position. It would mean that the authoritative figure and “head honcho,” such as the Editor in Chief, make sure that the responsibilities of that person are getting done. This calls for constant supervision and regulation of the responsibilities and tasks. Rather than a free-for-all, I’ll-do-what-I-want attitude, the division of labor must be restored in order to produce a sufficient product at the end of the year—the magazine.