The Guardian view on the policy to Easter: Jesus of platitudes | Editorial

Theresa May the message of Easter, which marks a further step in the direction of the return of religion as part of identity politics. It is nothing new, in essence: your is unnervingly similar to how David Cameron the message of Easter last year. He claimed that: “responsibility, hard work, charity, compassion, and pride in working for the common good … are Christian values, and you should give us to tell the trust, Yes, we are a Christian country and we are proud of it … But they are also values that speak to all in the UK – for people of all faiths and none.”

She said: “This Easter, I think of these values we share – values that I learned in my own childhood, growing up in a parsonage. The values of compassion, community, and citizenship. The sense of obligation we have to each other. These are the values that we all share, and values the lived visible everyday, from the Christians as well as people of other faiths or none.”

The difference is that you may feel. In such emotional layers of the great political upheavals are born.

It does not matter, in this context, that neither Cameron nor woman could live up to the values it proclaims. Between the banality and the policy of the shadow falls. It is noteworthy that these values, although, in General, be divided so as Christian, even if it is not specifically Christian: both politicians hasten to add that compassion and community are, in fact, the values that everyone in the country, whatever their religious beliefs or lack of them. This will undermine the original proposal would not, if it is a question of logic, but it is not. It is really a question of nationalism and identity.

This kind of religious nationalism is an international trend today. It is at work in the French elections, which has in Germany, Martin Schulz, the SPD-candidate, sent a remarkably pious message of Easter. Populists in Europe to claim to defend the Christian heritage against a growing Muslim threat. In America, the white Evangelical vote swung overwhelmingly to Donald Trump in a manner which showed that a rich religious heritage has been reduced to an unlovely aspect of the cultural or ethno-nationalist identity. All of this looks like a retreat from the internationalist, rationalist, and secular values that appeared triumphantly before the financial crisis. To the extent that it is really a retreat from these values, it may be because they had come to the hollow, to very many people, who have believed, perhaps, that provide in them: a society, notionally, on the basis of free and informed decisions from equal to equal in a fair marketplace turned out amazing inequality. But it is also possible that these values were never as common as they seemed to be. There were identity politics all through the 20th century, even if these were generally class-based, or after the consultation about the political philosophy. It is only with the withdrawal of the traditional class identities and the dissolution of the old relationships of the right and left, religious identities, come once more to the fore.

Woman. the appeal to the Christianity in resonance with the overwhelming majority of self-identifying Anglicans, which go rarely, if ever, in the Church Analysis by Professor Linda Woodhead shows that people, their religious identity as a Church of England, were about 20% more likely to vote, the EU is to leave to as the “nones” of the same age. This was not seen an effect, in other religions or denominations, and, it seems, reflects the belief in the peculiarity of the English rather than a theological conviction. Woman Can hear the dog whistle.

It may not be a “we” without a “you”. Identity politics are by nature divisive and exclusive. That is why they are attractive to politicians who need to look distinctive. Appeals to the religious identity, or even anti-religious, such as the French laïcité, deep into the roots of nationalism. Politicians, issued with this rhetoric (and even Jeremy Corbyn, the message of Easter this year), the responsibility to use it carefully.