For years, a conflict has been brewing between Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and the European People’s Party (EPP), the supranational organization of Christian democratic and center-right parties in EU member states. After much hesitation, the EPP suspended Orban’s party, Fidesz, in March last year, and is now deciding whether to expel it.
It has plenty of good reasons for doing so. Fidesz has not only dismantled democracy and the rule of law in Hungary, but also demonized the EU as a tyrannical institution that is supposedly robbing Europeans of their freedom.
Since Fidesz’s suspension, Orban has hit back by saying that he alone is the real defender of Christian democracy, and that his EPP critics are sellouts to liberalism.
Orban’s posturing has seduced conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic, but the image he is projecting is false advertising.
It would be a mistake to think that the Fidesz-EPP conflict is mainly about political principles; it is about power, plain and simple. Still, the question of who will claim the legacy of Christian democracy matters a great deal to Europe. Historically, Christian democracy has been the most important political force behind the project of European integration.
Yet, despite its enormous historical significance, Christian democracy — its ideas and institutions — are not well understood. The ideology has no obvious founders or canonical thinkers, and unlike liberalism, it lacks a conceptual anchor that distinguishes it clearly from other strands of political thought.
Christian democracy was born in the 19th century as a means of reconciling Christianity — particularly Catholicism — with modern democracy. Its protagonists accepted French aristocrat and Catholic Alexis de Tocqueville’s seminal insight that democracy was an unstoppable world-historical force.
The question, then, was how to make it safe for religion.
One answer was through political parties committed to defending Christian — and again, particularly Catholic — interests.
Yet the creation of such parties did not signal a full acceptance of pluralist representative democracy. A religion that claims universal validity could not allow itself to become just another interest group among many. That is why, for a long time, the Vatican openly criticized Catholic politicians’ efforts to play the parliamentary game.
However, things changed after World War II. Christians who had trusted fascists to save them from godless communism had learned the hard way that allying with the forces of the extreme, anti-democratic right was a disastrous mistake.
They would go on to embrace democracy and human rights wholeheartedly, as the Catholic Church eventually did at the Second Vatican Council in 1962.
During the Cold War, Christian democrats came to be known as the quintessential anti-communists, but they also had an ambitious social agenda. In Germany, Italy and elsewhere, they established welfare states designed to strengthen families and reward behavior informed by traditional values.
It is not particularly surprising that some of these policies would qualify as “illiberal.” After all, some leading Christian democratic thinkers remained explicitly opposed to liberalism, which they identified with secularism, materialism and selfish individualism.
However, unlike today’s far-right populists such as Orban and League party leader Matteo Salvini in Italy, these earlier Christian democrats relentlessly criticized the idea of the nation state, too. Owing to their religious perspective, they regarded nation or state-based claims of sovereignty as a form of hubris.
As Giorgio La Pira, one of the founders of Italian Christian democracy, said in 1945, the Catholic conception of society is “opposed to every nationalist, racial, or class-based conception of the political order.”
Moreover, German and Italian Catholics still remembered how newly unified nation states had oppressed religious minorities in the late 19th century.
Given this suspicion of nation state sovereignty, it is no accident that Christian democrats played a critical role in advancing European integration.
They endorsed pluralism and federalism for the sake of dispersing power across the continent, and they were instrumental in creating the European Convention on Human Rights, which was designed to provide a check on the power of nation-states.
They saw society as a pluralistic community of communities — not least the family. They also understood that minority rights and civil society — including, of course, religious institutions — must be protected.
It is thus a travesty for today’s self-declared “national conservatives” and far-right populists to claim the mantle of Christian democracy. Unlike true Christian democrats, Orban and other aspiring authoritarians pretend to be the only authentic representatives of a homogeneous people. In pursuit of power, they do not hesitate to reject pluralism and trample on minority rights.
To their mind, says social scientist Olivier Roy, Christianity is purely about belonging to a tribe, not belief, let alone ethical conduct.
As the Orban-aligned Bishop of Szeged-Csanad Laszlo Kiss-Rigo said: “In Europe, even an atheist is a ‘Christian.’”
The concern is not with Christianity but with Christendom, understood as a civilization inherently hostile to Islam.
The sad, sordid truth is that Orban and his ilk are trying to wage an EU-wide culture war because they have found this to be an effective way to distract domestic and international attention from the kleptocratic autocracies they have created.
By portraying their critics as crazed progressives pushing for same-sex marriage and ever-more scurrilous forms of identity politics, they avoid any discussion of their cronyism, politicization of the judiciary and stifling control of the media.
For its part, the EPP has, one hopes, finally understood that “protecting the family” hardly matters if it means giving a regime a license to destroy democracy.
Whether one cares about the fate of Christian democracy in particular, or about democracy in general, it is important to call Orban and his confederates what they are: exponents of a far-right politics that has never cared about Christianity or democracy.
Jan-Werner Mueller is professor of politics at Princeton University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
A series of strong earthquakes in Hualien County not only caused severe damage in Taiwan, but also revealed that China’s power has permeated everywhere. A Taiwanese woman posted on the Internet that she found clips of the earthquake — which were recorded by the security camera in her home — on the Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu. It is spine-chilling that the problem might be because the security camera was manufactured in China. China has widely collected information, infringed upon public privacy and raised information security threats through various social media platforms, as well as telecommunication and security equipment. Several former TikTok employees revealed
The bird flu outbreak at US dairy farms keeps finding alarming new ways to surprise scientists. Last week, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) confirmed that H5N1 is spreading not just from birds to herds, but among cows. Meanwhile, media reports say that an unknown number of cows are asymptomatic. Although the risk to humans is still low, it is clear that far more work needs to be done to get a handle on the reach of the virus and how it is being transmitted. That would require the USDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to get
For the incoming Administration of President-elect William Lai (賴清德), successfully deterring a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attack or invasion of democratic Taiwan over his four-year term would be a clear victory. But it could also be a curse, because during those four years the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will grow far stronger. As such, increased vigilance in Washington and Taipei will be needed to ensure that already multiplying CCP threat trends don’t overwhelm Taiwan, the United States, and their democratic allies. One CCP attempt to overwhelm was announced on April 19, 2024, namely that the PLA had erred in combining major missions
On April 11, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida delivered a speech at a joint meeting of the US Congress in Washington, in which he said that “China’s current external stance and military actions present an unprecedented and the greatest strategic challenge … to the peace and stability of the international community.” Kishida emphasized Japan’s role as “the US’ closest ally.” “The international order that the US worked for generations to build is facing new challenges,” Kishida said. “I understand it is a heavy burden to carry such hopes on your shoulders,” he said. “Japan is already standing shoulder to shoulder