Is There a Third Way? A Response to Giddens's The Third Way

Abstract

Since the early 1990s, there has been in the United Kingdom and the United States a new political position referred to as the Third Way that claims to be intermediate between neoliberalism and social democracy, transcending both. This new position, represented by the Clinton administration in the United States and the Blair Government in the United Kingdom, assumes that both social democracy and neoliberalism are obsolete and calls instead for a new set of public policies that are defined as the Third Way. This article analyzes the most detailed account of the Third Way in the English-speaking world, written by Professor Giddens. It shows that Giddens stereotypes both the neoliberal and the social democratic positions to an unrecognizable degree, failing to portray the varieties of social democratic policies in existence today in developed capitalist countries. The author shows how the Third Way is merely a recycling of liberal positions in some social policy areas and Christian democratic positions in others. Where the Third Way intends to be innovative—as in the U.K. New Deal program—the programs are pale copies of successful labor market policies carried out by northern European social democratic parties. The author concludes that the Third Way, with its questioning of the universalistic welfare state and its preference for assistential and means-tested programs, signifies a break with the social democratic tradition, transforming it into a hybrid between Christian democracy and neoliberalism.