Third Way

The infamous “Third Way” is surely one of the most popular yet slippery political strategies taken up by politicians and “politicians” of vastly different origins, stripes, and flavors. The quest for a new path, a different political model to rise above outdated forms and ideas of political action, has become something like a political Holy Grail—a miraculous source of lasting influence and power.

Among the most recent to lose his bearings while searching for a third way—and briefly land on the front pages of (some) international newspapers—was a man named Andreas Münzhuber, one of the leaders of the German neo-Nazi party Der Dritte Weg (“The Third Way”). He met his end during a nostalgic hike near Hitler’s Eagle’s Nest in the Bavarian Alps, where he unwisely stepped on a wet root and fell to his death.

At the opposite end of the political spectrum, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair made a much more visible and successful attempt at a Third Way years ago, with his own version of social democracy. In doing so, he confirmed the wisdom of Abraham Lincoln—that you can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you can’t fool all the people all the time. Although Blair’s political legacy is now (rightly) scrutinized through the lens of his blind, boundless support for the U.S. intervention in Iraq, his broader political doctrine also deserves attention for its lasting consequences.

Blair tried to “upgrade” classic social democracy with a Frankenstein-style ideological stew—economic neoliberalism combined with social liberalism. Margaret Thatcher with a human face. Anyone seriously examining the rise of populist authoritarianism will have to grapple with Blair’s legacy. Economic neoliberalism created a massive reservoir of disillusioned and angry members of the working class and lower-middle classes—people who had traditionally supported the left or the political center but now flock to nationalist and authoritarian peddlers of intolerance and hate.

Blair’s focus on and support for minority rights ultimately did little to help those communities. On the contrary, when paired with the aggressive neoliberal impoverishment of the working class, it served populists an opportunity on a silver platter: to channel public frustration and rage toward the LGBTQ+ community, migrants, feminists, and other scapegoats blamed for everything wrong in today’s world.

Given that some populist wannabe-authoritarians are drifting ever closer to outright fascism, a cynic might conclude that Blair’s and Münzhuber’s Third Ways ultimately lead to the same place—though, of course, Blair cannot be accused of intent, while Münzhuber, in his ideological zeal (and forgive the crassness given the tragic circumstances of his death), quite literally failed to watch his step.

You could, in a way, count Russian President Vladimir Putin among Third Way seekers. His ideological formula—intended to guide Russia into a bright future—is brewed from seemingly contradictory ingredients: Soviet-style totalitarianism, religious nationalism, homophobia, and a fresh concoction of neo-fascism.

Of course, not every politician trying to chart a new path out of the mess of public anger and political stagnation is comparable to Münzhuber or Putin. I do believe many are guided by good intentions in their Third Way pursuits. But we also know where good intentions often lead. Most of these attempts—from Macron’s “on the other hand” in France to our own “not left, not right, but forward”—have tended, in the end, to benefit the far right the most.

The search for a Third Way isn’t limited to Europe. In feverishly polarized, pre-election America, two independent candidates are offering their own versions. Jill Stein—now a veteran of such political activism—is back at it. She’s known for dining with Vladimir Putin and for peeling off just enough votes from Hillary Clinton in key states in 2016 to help Donald Trump win. She’s offering American voters a Third Way again this year. Until recently, another such advocate was Robert F. Kennedy Jr., famous for his fervent anti-vaccine views, for burying animal carcasses in New York’s Central Park, and for his flexible interpretation of marital fidelity. He recently threw in the towel as an independent and endorsed Donald Trump. Apparently, to paraphrase the late Nejc Zaplotnik, it’s not the destination that matters—it’s the Third Way.

At this point, some of you might expect me to comment on the recent announcement of a new Third Way initiative here in Slovenia. I must disappoint you. Yes, democracy is in trouble, and people are understandably disillusioned with politics as they know it. The search for new ideas and paths should therefore be encouraged in principle; we shouldn’t trip up anyone proposing something new a priori.

But these things don’t happen in a vacuum. The current political and social state was shaped, in no small part, by some of the very people now presenting themselves as seekers of new ways. Historical memory and the consequences of their past actions—as well as experiences with other Third Way experiments—are why many people have legitimate questions and doubts. They’ll need to be persuaded with actions, not lofty slogans about broadness and openness.

Trying to arithmetically solve growing political polarization—whether by “going through the center” or “widening the tent”—has so far yielded few democratic breakthroughs. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Among the recent Slovenian reactions to a new Third Way initiative, I was struck by a comment from the president of the Slovenian Business Club. Asked whether this new political offering gave him hope for change, he replied he wasn’t too optimistic: “Running a country is more of a management job than a political one. Right now, we have too much politics and ideology, and not enough management.”

My inner cynic, shaped by a casual interest in history, couldn’t help but recall the words of Reich Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda Joseph Goebbels. In September 1933, at Geneva’s Hotel Carlton, he explained that “democracies only deliberate and never solve problems. The modern structure of the German state represents a higher form of democracy, where power, based on a popular mandate, is exercised authoritatively without any parliamentary interference that might dilute or obstruct the execution of the people’s will.”

Now, to be clear: I’m not comparing the president of the Slovenian Business Club to Goebbels. Doing so would surely earn me a well-deserved lawsuit. I believe he is guided by the best of intentions—at least toward entrepreneurs and “all other citizens who live from their own labor.” But again, we know where good intentions often lead.

Most past efforts at Third Ways haven’t yielded great results—but that shouldn’t stop us from trying to improve democracy and restore public trust in its institutions. Apathy only strengthens alternatives we know, from history, we’d do well to avoid.

Still, doing something doesn’t mean doing whatever—especially if driven by nothing more than the desire for power. A better starting point would be asking why so many people are disappointed in democracy today. We should invest our efforts in expanding trust in politics and its institutions—not, heaven forbid, in expanding the room for future cronies to exploit public anger.

The Third Way should lead to more, not less, freedom and democracy.

I apologize if writing about previous Third Way experiments kept dragging me back to stories of populism and authoritarianism. Believe me, that wasn’t my intention. It just sort of happened—organically, inevitably. But maybe that, too, is telling.