Friday, November 7, 2025
Last April the introduction of the newsletter was titled ‘what are we for?’. It was an exposition of the need to come to a positive and broad agenda based on human dignity. One aspect that was touched on was the notion of ‘tradition’. What we see is that many politicians and parties in the Christian and conservative corner refer to ‘tradition’. It is therefore important to explore what it means. Obviously there is nothing wrong with tradition as such. To the contrary, in many cases traditions are essential for many aspects of society. They often are an important channel of democratic life and guardrails for political institutions. Moreover many aspects of community life depend on traditions (even when we don’t call them that). However ‘tradition’ has also become a political term. One that can refer to many things. Often it is a reference to conservative notions regarding family and community but then often used in a context of some political clash over social – ethical issues. Furthermore, ‘tradition’ also became some umbrella term for an unspecified set of values. We think we know what tradition means until someone asks what it means. At that moment we don’t have a real answer to that question. The problem with ‘tradition’ as political term is that it can mean almost anything. It is often used to invoke some idealized past in which these values were respected (or rather under the assumption that they were). At the same time it is unclear ‘when’ that idealized past took place. Usually in western Europe it refers to the 1950’s and in central Europe often to the 19th century. Tradition as a political term is not used to refer to the medieval past or the Roman empire or the neolithic. It is therefore used in reference to a time that still falls as just compatible enough to be presented as ‘the good old times’. This means that tradition as political term is too often actually nostalgia for a better past that in most cases never existed as such. It is true that a number of parties can get votes by suggesting that it is possible to go back to this ‘golden past’ while in reality even these parties know that this is not achievable. We cannot really go back to that past as that idealized past did not exist as such and because we don’t want to give up the many things that are better now (healthcare for example). Equally important is to see that we need other values to discern between good and bad traditions. For example we (rightly) no longer accept traditions that demean or subjugate or even harm or kill people. This means that traditions as such need other values in order to remain of value. While traditions are essential, ‘tradition’ as political term is insufficient as a basis for parties and politicians who want to work based on Christian inspiration and values. The values that arise from Christian faith are ultimately not meant to restore an idealized past but help us forward to a better future and give us anchor points for actual and achievable policies. For example equal human dignity provides a basis for equal cooperation between Europe and Africa which is essential for both sides as we will see in the upcoming webinar of 17 November. The important questions that remain are why nostalgia has such a forceful political ‘pull’ for so many people and how Christian values can be the better alternative. This will be the topic for the introduction of the next Sallux newsletter.