Preliminary version

THOMAS MEYER
The Third Way at the Crossroads

The "Third Way" is a term that was coined by the Clinton administration in 1992 and later adopted by Tony Blair. It represents an attempt to create an up-to-date synthesis of social democracy and liberalism. In view of economic globalisation and the crisis in the welfare state, this is a legitimate undertaking which is supported by a long tradition of revisionism in social democracy. In a complex and rapidly changing world, pragmatic flexibility is indeed necessary with regard to the means which are to ensure a society in line with the fundamental and per se immutable values of social democracy, such as freedom, justice, solidarity. Although Tony Blair's concept still appears somewhat vague, it has made possible a revolution within the Labour Party. In addition to sweeping away the traditional tenets of socialisation (reference Godesberg), it has also resulted in substantial elements of neoliberalism being adopted in the programme of "New Labour". A transformed welfare state and an ensuing cultural revolution are to turn all citizens into "entrepreneurs" under their own responsibility and to enable them to succeed in the marketplace, adapting to its constantly changing conditions. The question arises how far the "Third Way" should serve as orientation for other social democratic parties. Here a clear distinction must be drawn between the need for adjustment of social-democratic political recipes on the one side and the constancy in the fundamental values of social democracy on the other. Adjustment must never go so far that the latter are abandoned. It is unavoidable that welfare-state mechanisms are adjusted so as to make individuals more responsible for their economic security. But the market must not have the last word on whether citizens can have a decent life or not. The welfare state must continue to guarantee a decent standard of living as a "citizen right". Correctly understood, the "Third Way" should assign to social security the function of helping out where the market fails. Anything else would mean abandoning the fundamental value of social democracy. It would impair the cohesion of society as well as the political prospects for social democracy. Only the radical right would profit from this.