Woke Culture and Post-Liberalism: The Response of Catholic Social Teaching

Since the xix century, liberalism has emerged in the West as the dominant worldview, articulating a political project based on three fundamental pillars: the centrality of individual autonomy, the limitation of state power, and a market regulated economy. This model, especially after the Second World War, became the normative horizon of Western democracies, with undoubtedly positive results: expansion of civil and political rights, sustained economic growth, poverty reduction in certain contexts and consolidation of relatively stable democratic regimes.

However, from the second half of the xx century, internal tensions, that would become more evident with the passage of time, began to manifest themselves.

The first of these tensions has to do with excessive confidence in individualism. Classical liberalism has celebrated freedom as the absence of external interference, but by absolutizing this impoverishing notion of freedom it ended up weakening the community bonds and the go in between institutions that give meaning to social life. The rise of consumerism and possessive individualism reduced the human being to an autonomous consumer, forgetting its relational and transcendent dimension.

The second tension comes from the dynamics of globalized capitalism. The exaltation of the free market, especially in its neoliberal version, led to growing inequality, the precariousness of work and the marketing of spheres of human life that should be protected from the logic of profit. The 2008 financial crisis showed the fragilities of this system, revealing that the markets lack internal mechanisms to guide them towards the common good. As Benedict xvi pointed out in Caritas in Veritate, the economy cannot function without ethics, because otherwise it becomes a source of exclusion and suffering: «the need of the economy to be autonomous, not to be subject to ‘interference’ of a moral nature, has led man to abuse economic instruments even in a destructive way» (CV 34).

The third tension manifests itself in the cultural and political terrain. Liberal neutrality relative to values was intended to guarantee a common space for plural coexistence, but in practice led to a kind of moral vacuum. By renouncing to propose a horizon of shared meaning, liberalism opened the door to cultural fragmentation and relativism. Thus, public life was impoverished, reduced to the sphere of technical management or the confrontation of individual interests, without a common language to speak of the good, truth or justice.

These tensions sharpened in the transition to the xxi. Disenchantment with politics, polarization, distrust of institutions, the expansion of populist and nationalist movements, and the impact of the digital revolution accelerated the perception that liberalism had lost its ability to integrate societies. It is in this context that both woke culture and post-liberalism emerge: two attempts to respond to the crisis, but which move in opposite directions.

Woke culture emphasizes the need to acknowledge historical injustices and to give voice to those who have been silenced by the dominant narrative. At the same time, post-liberalism seeks to overcome the liberal moral vacuum by revaluing the common good, tradition, and the role of religion in public life.

Thus, the crisis of liberalism has not only weakened the inherited political and economic order, but has opened the space for alternative proposals to emerge, each with valid intuitions but also with inherent dangers. The analysis of these movements therefore requires not only a cultural or political critique, but also a background anthropological and ethical reflection. And it is here that the Social Doctrine of the Church offers a more balanced and universal horizon, capable of integrating legitimate concerns for justice and community without falling into the extremes of relativism or authoritarianism.

The term woke, originally used in African-American culture to express the need to be «awake» to the injustices of racism, has evolved to become a broad concept that designates a permanently alert attitude against any form of discrimination, exclusion or social inequality. Although the root of the phenomenon is legitimate – the defense of the dignity of historically marginalized people and communities – the way in which woke culture has expanded reveals both significant successes and limits.

1. Historical origins and cultural expansion

The woke movement has its origins in civil rights struggles in the United States during the second half of the xx century. The denunciation of structural racism and the affirmation of equal rights for the African-American population gave rise to a broader awareness of the need to make situations of exclusion visible. Subsequently, this framework was extended to other areas: feminism, sexual diversity, recognition of ethnic and religious minorities, defense of people with disabilities, among others.

In the xxi^st century, social networks played a decisive role in the expansion of this culture. Platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and Instagram made it possible to amplify the voices of historically silenced groups, generate global movements such as #MeToo or Black Lives Matter and create transnational communities articulated around common causes. The notion of being woke then went from being a niche term to becoming a global cultural emblem.

There is no doubt that the woke phenomenon has had positive effects. Among them are:

• Raising awareness of historical injustices: By bringing racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination to the forefront, it has led to a change in public perception. What was tolerated or made invisible a few decades ago is today socially unacceptable.
• Empowerment of minorities: traditionally marginalized groups have found in this framework a language to express their demands and a space to organize collectively.
• Critical review of history: the need to review the past in the light of the victims has opened a necessary debate on historical memory and official narratives.
• Global expansion of solidarity: causes born in local contexts have acquired global resonance, showing the interconnectedness of struggles for justice.

2. Limits and risks of the movement

Despite its contributions, woke culture has limits that must be pointed out:

• Identity reduction: by absolutizing belonging to a group (race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.), there is a risk of reducing the person’s wealth to a single trait. This tendency contradicts the Christian vision of the human being as a unique and unrepeatable person, whose dignity transcends any sociological category.
• Moral relativism: to the extent that each group claims its «truth» and its own story, the possibility of a shared ethical horizon becomes difficult. The notion of objective truth is diluted in a plurality of irreconcilable perspectives.
• Cancel culture: The practice of «canceling» those who express opinions considered offensive has generated a climate of intolerance and fear. Instead of promoting dialogue and conversion, exclusion and silence are imposed.
• Social fragmentation: By emphasizing differences over common bonds, woke culture can fuel tribalism and weaken social cohesion.

3. Discernment from the Social Doctrine of the Church

The Church shares some intuitions of the woke culture, particularly the need to recognize and redress historical injustices, as well as the centrality of human dignity. In Fratelli tutti, Pope Francis explicitly condemns racism and any form of contempt for the other, recalling that «a readiness to discard others finds expression in vicious attitudes that we thought long past, such as racism, which retreats underground only to keep reemerging» (FT 20). Likewise, the Social Doctrine of the Church has insisted on the preferential option for the poor and excluded, which implies giving voice to those who have been marginalized.

However, the Church warns against the excesses that can arise when justice is sought without reference to universal truth or the common good. As Gaudium et Spes points out, the true human community is founded on respect for the human person (GS 25), and this requires an anthropology that recognizes the human being not only in its particular identity, but in its universal vocation towards communion.

4. Towards overcoming woke logic

The Social Doctrine of the Church does not deny the legitimate concerns of the woke culture, but integrates them into a broader horizon. In the face of the reduction of identity, it proposes universal fraternity; in the face of relativism, the truth of the Gospel; in the face of cancellation, forgiveness and dialogue; in the face of fragmentation, the common good.

In this sense, Fratelli tutti constitutes a fraternal correction to the woke culture phenomenon: it recognizes its concern for justice but warns that the indifferent and ruthless individualism into which we have fallen is not the way: « Individualism does not make us more free, more equal, more fraternal. The mere sum of individual interests is not capable of generating a better world for the whole human family.» (FT 105). Only from openness to the other as a brother or sister – beyond any identity category – is it possible to build a just and reconciled society.

The phenomenon known as post-liberalism has gained strength in recent years, especially in the United States, but with resonances in Europe and Latin America. It is an intellectual and political current that arises from the conviction that liberalism is not only going through a conjunctural crisis, but that it is exhausted as a civilizational project. From this perspective, liberal modernity has failed because, by rooting itself on an individualistic anthropology and a reductive conception of freedom, it has undermined the very foundations of community life, stable political order, and integral human flourishing.

1. Proposals of post-liberalism

Authors such as Patrick Deneen (author of Why Liberalism Failed and Regime Change: Toward a Postliberal Future), Adrian Vermeule (author of Common Good Constitutionalism) or Russell Ronald Reno (editor of First Things) are prominent exponents of post-liberalism, which is not a single ideology or a closed doctrine, but a plural movement composed of diverse currents that share a common critique of the liberal project.

According to post-liberals, liberalism has reached the limit of its own logic, producing multiple forms of failure: political, by generating paralyzed and fragmented societies; economic, by increasing inequalities and concentrating wealth in a few hands; moral, by eroding the traditional values that sustained Western civilization.

Although they come from different traditions – conservative, socialist, communitarian, and republican –post-liberals share several criticisms of the current system. They reject statism, consumerism, the supposed neutrality of the state, the rigid division between left and right, and the purely negative concept of freedom. Instead, they promote principles such as the common good, subsidiarity, civic virtue, and the rebuilding of a more communal economy, organized through local corporations and networks.

In its analysis, the western left has given priority to policies of individual emancipation over those of solidarity, while the western right has focused on the individual, weakening the sense of community. They also criticize the effects of globalization, which has destabilized the middle class and suburban communities, weakening national cohesion.

Inspired by Adrian Pabst, author of Postliberal Politics: The Coming Era of Renewal (2021), we could identify three major internal currents of post-liberalism: National-conservatives (socially conservative but economically liberal), Religious fundamentalists (combining a post-liberal economy with a nation-state in which religion plays a central role), and Pluralist Communitarians (defending a personalist and communitarian vision).

A common element of the three currents is their rejection of extreme individualism and the proliferation of individual rights conceived as credits, which, according to them, fragment society, erode collective identity, increase inequalities and favor the dissolution of States under the pressure of globalization.

Except for National-conservatives, post-liberals advocate for a more active role of the state in the economy, as opposed to the free market. They consider that liberalism has produced a market-state model, where human relationships are reduced to monetary transactions and the economy is disconnected from social life.

In the social sphere, they propose to restore the traditional family as the basis of society, which translates into an explicit opposition to equal marriage, gender theory and abortion, defended by the woke culture. They see the advancement of LGBTQIA+ rights as a reflection of the influence of liberal elites.

Finally, some authors propose the strategy of withdrawing into small communities as a space of cultural resistance, with the intention of re-Christianizing the West from the ground up.

Their criticism of liberalism is profound and they accuse it of having established a «soft totalitarianism», subtly imposed through the institutions and the dominant culture.

In summary, post-liberals have articulated various proposals:

• Recovery of the common good as a guiding principle: the State should cease to be neutral and assume an active role in the promotion of a substantive conception of the common good, understood as the good of the national community.
• A revaluation of the natural law and virtue: politics cannot be limited to the management of interests, but must direct social life towards the realization of human nature and the cultivation of civic and moral virtues.
• Strengthening of community and tradition: in the face of the dissolution of social ties, post-liberalism stresses the centrality of the family, the local community and the transmission of traditional values.
• Reintegration of religion into the public sphere: revindicating the role of Christianity – and in particular of Catholicism – as an indispensable cultural and moral foundation for social and political life.

In some cases, these proposals translate into policy visions close to fundamentalism, which raise the need for the State to formally recognize the primacy of the Catholic faith and subordinate civil laws to the principles of divine law.

2. Risks and limitations

Although post-liberalism is right to point out the shortcomings of contemporary liberalism, its proposals present several risks:

• Authoritarian temptation: by wanting to replace liberal neutrality with an explicitly confessional political order, it creates the risk of imposing faith instead of proposing it, violating religious freedom and the legitimate autonomy of the political sphere.
• Idealization of the past: Some post-liberal discourses, such as Rob Dreher in his book The Benedict option: a strategy for christians in a post-Christian nation (2017), or Edmund Waldstein in his book Integralism and the Common Good (2022), tend to idealize medieval Christianity as a model, without sufficiently recognizing the challenges of contemporary pluralism or the lessons learned in the field of human rights.
• Ambiguity of the common good: when we speak of the «common good», it is not always clear whether it is understood as the set of conditions that allow the flourishing of all, or as an ideological project defined by a dominant group. This ambiguity can lead to exclusions or instrumentalizations.
• Risk of polarization: By presenting itself as a frontal alternative to liberalism, post-liberalism can contribute to ideological polarization rather than building bridges in already fragmented societies.

3. Ecclesial discernment

The Social Doctrine of the Church shares some concerns of post-liberalism: it criticizes individualism, denounces the injustices of the deregulated market, stresses the centrality of the common good (in the sense of seeking the good for the family of all peoples) and vindicates the community dimension of the human being.

However, the Catholic Church cannot endorse a return to models of Christianity that confuse the spiritual and the temporal. As the Second Vatican Council recalls in Gaudium et Spes 36 the political community and the Church are autonomous and each is competent in its own sphere, although they must cooperate in promoting the good of the person.

The true contribution of the Catholic Church does not consist in imposing a specific political order, but in illuminating social life and orienting frameworks towards justice, solidarity and fraternity, offering the Gospel in a logic of dialogue and encounter with today’s world, with its languages and cultural references. In this sense, Fratelli tutti constitutes a correction to post-liberalism: it recognizes the need to overcome individualistic liberalism, but warns against exclusionary nationalism and authoritarianism. Pope Francis calls us to build a social friendship that excludes no one and that recognizes the dignity of all, regardless of their creed or cultural belonging.

In the background of both woke culture and post-liberalism we find what the Social Doctrine of the Church identifies as flawed anthropologies. In other words, behind cultural and political debates lie partial or erroneous understandings of what it means to be human. The Church insists that every social, political or economic proposal must be based on an adequate understanding of the person, created in the image of God, endowed with inviolable dignity and called towards communion.

1. Liberal individualism

Liberalism, in its classical and neoliberal form, has promoted a vision of the human being as an autonomous individual, defined primarily by his ability to choose. The ideal of negative freedom – understood as the absence of coercion – has led to a reduction of the human being to a consumer of goods and services. This anthropology leads to a homo economicus, who makes decisions guided by self-interest and the consequent search for profit maximization.

The Church has repeatedly criticized this reductive vision. Already in Quadragesimo anno (1931), Pius xi warned that

Benedict xvi, in Caritas in Veritate, emphasized that without the principle of gratuitousness and gift, the economy becomes dehumanizing (CV 34). And Pope Francis, in Evangelii Gaudium, denounced the idolatry of money and exclusion (EG 53).

2. Identity relativism

Woke culture, on the other hand, offers another problematic anthropology: the reduction of the person to a particular identity. To be human would mean to belong to a group defined by characteristics such as race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion. This vision legitimately responds to the need to recognize stories of oppression, but it runs the risk of absolutizing difference and denying the reality and universal dimension of human dignity.

From the Christian perspective, the person cannot be reduced to a partial identity, because its value does not depend on social categories but on its condition as a child of God. Christianity, therefore, holds that every identity finds its fullness in communion.

3. Authoritarian communitarianism

Post-liberalism, in its most radical versions, risks replacing liberal individualism with authoritarian communitarianism. In this framework, the person is defined almost exclusively by its belonging to a cultural or religious community, and its freedom is subordinated to the collective project. Although the common good is sought to be recovered, there is a danger that the community may be conceived in an exclusive way, as an «us» that affirms itself by denying the «others».

The Church recognizes the importance of the community, but warns that it must always be at the service of the person. In the words of John Paul ii: «Authentic democracy is possible only in a State ruled by law, and on the basis of a correct conception of the human person.» (Centesimus Annus 46). For this reason, the common good cannot be understood as a totality that crushes the individual, but as a horizon that allows the realization of each and every one.

4. The Christian anthropology of gift and communion

In the face of these reductionist anthropologies, the Christian proposal is articulated around three fundamental axes:

• The inalienable dignity of the person: every human being, created in the image of God, possesses an absolute value that does not depend on its economic utility or its belonging to a group.
• Constitutive relationality: the human being is only understood in relation to others. For this reason, each person can only fully find himself through the sincere gift of himself.
• The universal vocation to communion: all people are called to form one family in God. This excludes both individualism and tribalism.

5. Practical consequences

This Christian anthropology has concrete consequences:

• In the economic sphere, it requires structures that respect the dignity of each worker and promote solidarity.
• In the cultural sphere, it calls for overcoming identity divisions and recognizing the richness of diversity in unity.
• In the political sphere, it demands institutions that guarantee freedom and participation, avoiding both fragmentation and authoritarianism.

In short, Christian anthropology offers a criterion of discernment in the face of the reductive anthropologies of liberalism, woke culture and post-liberalism. Only by recognizing the human being as a person, endowed with dignity, relationality and vocation towards communion, is it possible to build a just and humane social order.

The concept of the common good is central in Christian tradition and in the Social Doctrine of the Church. The Magisterium has presented it as a fundamental criterion of discernment in social, political and economic life. However, this term is not without ambiguities and is often the subject of divergent interpretations: in some cases, reduced to a mere balance of interests; in others, becoming a justification for imposing an ideological or authoritarian order.

1. The common good in the tradition of the Church

The Second Vatican Council, in Gaudium et Spes, offered one of the most quoted definitions: « the common good … the sum of those conditions of social life which allow social groups and their individual members relatively thorough and ready access to their own fulfillment « (GS 26).

This definition has several implications:

• The common good is not an abstract «whole» above people, but the horizon that guarantees the fulfilment of each individual.
• It includes both material goods (food, health, housing, work) and spiritual and cultural goods (education, religious freedom, political participation).
• It requires everyone’s participation in its construction, in line with the principle of subsidiarity.

In the Christian perspective, the common good can never be separated from the dignity of the person or from the universal vocation to fraternity.

2. Ambiguities in contemporary discourse

In the current debate, the concept of the common good is tensed between different interpretations:

• In liberalism: it tends to be understood as the sum of individual goods. The common good is reduced to guaranteeing peaceful coexistence and the maximization of private interests through the market or the social contract. This vision forgets the transcendent and communal dimension of the human being.
• In woke culture: the common good tends to fragment into a multiplicity of particular «goods» linked to specific identities. The universal horizon dissolves into partial demands that, although legitimate, end in permanent conflict with each other.
• In post-liberalism: the common good can be understood as a substantive project imposed from above for a national community or a part of society. Instead of serving everyone, it becomes a justification for excluding those who do not share the same vision.

In all three cases, ambiguity appears: liberalism dilutes it, woke culture fragments it, post-liberalism instrumentalizes it.

3. The vision of the common good in the Social Doctrine of the Church

The Social Doctrine of the Church proposes a concept of the common good that overcomes these limitations:

• Universality: the common good belongs to each and every one, without exclusions. It is not the imposition of the majority or the privilege of a few.
• Transcendent dimension: the common good is not exhausted in the material. It includes openness to God and the spiritual dimension of the human being.
• Participation and subsidiarity: building the common good requires the involvement of all social actors, from local communities to global institutions.
• Orientation towards the most vulnerable: the common good is measured from the margins: if it does not include the poor and discarded, it ceases to be truly common.

In the ecological crisis, the common good requires a care for the common home that goes beyond national or business interests. Laudato si’ recalls that «the earth is essentially a common heritage» (LS 93). In the migration crisis, the common good cannot be limited to the security of a few countries, but must recognize the dignity and rights of migrants. Fratelli tutti insists that

4. Towards a comprehensive understanding

The current challenge is to recover the authentic sense of the common good in the face of its caricatures:

• It is not a mere sum of interests (liberal vision).
• It is not fragmentation into partial demands (woke culture vision).
• It is not the imposition of an ideological order (post-liberal vision).

It is, rather, the shared and supportive task of building social conditions in which every person, and especially the most vulnerable, can flourish.

In the broad perspective of the Social Doctrine of the Church, Pope Francis’ encyclical Fratelli tutti (2020) constitutes a particularly lucid response to the challenges posed by woke culture and post-liberalism, which unfortunately are also the roots of the polarization in our Catholic communities between ultra-progressives and ultra-conservatives. In the face of these partial alternatives, Fratelli tutti proposes a universal horizon of fraternity and social friendship.

1. The centrality of universal brotherhood

The encyclical starts from an observation: humanity is going through a crisis of meaning marked by indifference, disregard and violence. In this context, Pope Francis recalls that we are all brothers and sisters, called to recognize one another in a sole human family. This conviction is not based on identity affinities or social contracts, but on the theological truth that we are all created by the same Father.

The second chapter of the encyclical evokes the parable of the Good Samaritan as a paradigm of fraternity. It shows that the neighbor is not defined by belonging to a group, but by the willingness to take care of the other, even when he is different or considered an enemy. In contrast to the logic of woke culture which absolutizes difference, and in contrast to post-liberalism, which tends to absolutize community belonging, Fratelli tutti offers the logic of fraternity: no one can be left out of the category of «brother.»

2. Criticism of the excesses of liberalism and the market

The encyclical Fratelli tutti is not naïve regarding the structural problems facing the world today. The Pope denounces the dismissive culture that reduces people to objects of consumption and discards the weak, migrants and the poor. It also criticizes blind faith in the market as a solution to all problems, recalling that «The marketplace, by itself, cannot resolve every problem» (FT 168).

In this sense, the encyclical coincides with some intuitions of post-liberalism in denouncing individualism and neoliberalism. However, it does so without resorting to authoritarian or nostalgic proposals for a past Christianity, but by calling for a new culture of global solidarity.

3. Criticism of tribalism and populism

Pope Francis also warns against the tendency to close oneself within an idea and not see reality: «True wisdom demands an encounter with reality» (FT 47). The Argentine Pope also denounces populisms that manipulate people with hate speeches and nationalisms that build walls instead of building bridges (FT 156). These criticisms resonate both in the face of the risks of woke culture – which absolutizes identity and does not go to the encounter with reality – and in the face of the drifts of post-liberalism – which can lead to exclusionary nationalisms.

Fratelli tutti, on the other hand, invites a policy of great vision, capable of seeking the common good beyond immediate electoral calculations. A policy that is measured by its ability to include the poorest, to welcome migrants and to guarantee fundamental rights to all. A policy that, without mixing or fragmenting the temporal and transcendent order, contributes from its role to the promotion of integral and solidary human development, of every person both in the individual and social dimensions.

4. Dialogue as a path

One of the central axes of the encyclical is the importance of dialogue (FT, chapter 6). Francis stresses that universal fraternity is not built through the imposition of an ideology, but through sincere encounter, recognition of the other and the shared search for truth. In the words of the encyclical:

This emphasis on dialogue offers an answer both to the relativism of the woke culture – which turns truth into a matter of immeasurable perspectives – and to the authoritarian temptation of post-liberalism – which seeks to impose a single vision.

5. The policies of social friendship

In the second part of the encyclical, Francis develops the idea of a «social friendship,» which goes beyond mere coexistence. It is not a question of mere mutual tolerance, but of building a true community based on solidarity. This implies:

• Promoting social justice and economic equity.
• Ensuring the political participation of all, especially the most vulnerable.
• Fostering reconciliation and forgiveness in context of conflict.

The social friendship proposed in Fratelli tutti is not an abstract category, but a concrete policy project that seeks to humanize social relations and institutions.

6. The universal openness

The Pope recalls that:

Finally, (FT, chapters 7 and 8), the encyclical insists that fraternity cannot be limited to national borders or cultural circles of belonging. In a globalized world, love of the neighbor must be translated into universal openness that recognizes the rights of migrants, the shared responsibility in the face of climate change and the need for more effective international institutions. In this way, Fratelli tutti expands the notion of the common good to a global scale, proposing a true global ethic of solidarity.

Practical Applications in Politics, Economics and Culture

The Social Doctrine of the Church, and in a particular way Fratelli Tutti, does not limit itself to offering abstract principles; it is always oriented to the praxis embodied in reality. The Church’s social teaching seeks to illuminate concrete action in the various areas of social life. The proposal of universal fraternity and social friendship can be translated into policies and practices grounded in the fields of politics, economics and culture.

In the political sphere

Policy, when conceived as social charity, becomes one of the highest forms of charity. It is not a matter of mere technical management or a struggle for power, but of service to the common good. Some specific applications would be:

• Promotion of a long-term policy: in the face of short-term electoral logic, the Church invites us to design policies that think about the next generations, not only about the next elections. This is essential to confront the ecological crisis, structural poverty, migration and the search for world peace.
• Defense of the dignity of all citizens: policies must guarantee fundamental rights such as education, health, housing and decent work, avoiding all forms of discrimination.
• Building social consensus: instead of fostering polarization, a policy of dialogue is required, which integrates diverse sensitivities around the common good.

In this sense, Fratelli tutti opposes both technocratic elitism and exclusionary populism, proposing instead a policy that is born of listening to the people and an openness to diversity.

In the economic sphere

The global economy faces the challenge of overcoming the neoliberal logic that has generated inequality, precariousness and exclusion. The Social Doctrine of the Church offers very concrete guidelines here:

• Subordinating the economy to the common good: legitimate profit cannot be the only criterion of economic activity. For this reason, the economy needs to integrate the logic of gift and gratuitousness.
• Promote decent work: employment should not be reduced to a cost of production but should be recognized as an essential dimension of human dignity and the integral development of the person.
• Promoting the social and solidarity economy: cooperatives, benefit societies and other forms of association are concrete ways to put solidarity into practice. A system where a small group of people owns the production and distribution of goods and services, seeking, in each of its decisions, the maximization of profit over the well-being of the workers is unjust.
• Integral ecology: production and consumption must take into account not only the immediate profit, but also the care of the common home and the future of the next generations.

In the cultural field

The crisis of liberalism, the fragmentation of the woke culture and the authoritarian temptation of post-liberalism are, at the core, expressions of a cultural crisis. The Church’s proposal implies a cultural renewal based on fraternity. Some applications would be:

• Overcoming relativism and populism: contemporary culture needs to rediscover the possibility of a shared truth and a common language to speak of the good and justice.
• Promoting interreligious and intercultural dialogue: Nostra Aetate and Fratelli tutti agree that peace is built through the sincere encounter between cultures and religions.
• Revaluing historical memory in a reconciling way: in the face of the cancellation or ideological manipulation of history, the Church proposes a historical memory that recognizes the pain of the victims, but that opens paths of forgiveness and reconciliation.
• Educating for fraternity: schools, universities and the various formation courses should train not only in technical skills, but also in civic virtues and openness to others.

The practical translation of the Church’s Social Doctrine consists, in short, in living universal fraternity in all the dimensions of social life. This implies policies conceived as service, an economy at the service of man and a culture of encounter. Thus, Fratelli tutti’s vision becomes a concrete project to transform the contemporary world, avoiding both the traps of identity relativism and those of communitarian authoritarianism.

Conclusion: universal fraternity as a Catholic alternative

Woke culture and post-liberalism, although they emerge as responses to the crisis of contemporary liberalism, fail to offer adequate and lasting solutions. The first, by absolutizing identity, runs the risk of fragmenting society into irreconcilable tribes, canceling out the horizon of universality and dialogue. The second, by seeking to replace liberal neutrality with a confessional or communitarian order, runs the risk of falling into authoritarianism and instrumentalizing Faith for political purposes. Both, in essence, reveal the inability of ideologies to fully respond to the fundamental questions about the human being, justice and coexistence.

The Social Doctrine of the Church, on the other hand, offers a broader and more balanced vision. The Pontifical Magisterium insists on two inseparable truths: human life is sacred and human life is social. As Pope Leo xiv also recalled in his homilies and speeches in his first months of pontificate, from these two fundamental certainties derive the principles of the dignity of the person, solidarity, subsidiarity and the common good. These principles of the Social Doctrine of the Church make it possible to overcome the false anthropologies of both individualistic liberalism and of the extremes of identity or authoritarianism.

Fratelli tutti synthesizes this path by proposing universal fraternity and social friendship as an answer to today’s fragmented world. In the face of the idolatry of the market, it denounces the culture of dismissiveness and calls for an economy that puts the poor and vulnerable at the center. In the face of the relativism of woke culture, remember that we are all brothers, without exception. In the face of the authoritarian temptation of post-liberalism, it insists that policies must be social charity and service to the common good, not ideological imposition.

Universal fraternity is not an abstract ideal, but a concrete vocation that translates into inclusive policies, solidarity economies and cultures of encounter. It is the Catholic alternative to the inadequacies of liberalism and its contemporary critics. It is, in sum, the way that responds to the profound truth of the human being: created in the image of God, called to the gift of self and destined for eternal communion.

As Pope Francis reminds us,

This is a proposal that the Church offers to today’s human beings. For this reason, it is not just another ideology in the political arena, but an invitation to rediscover what unites us at the core, to build together a world in which no one is discarded, a world where the common good is lived as a concrete and shared reality, and where universal fraternity is the horizon that guides our actions and existence.