The Blair-Schroeder Third Way -- a Commentary
By David Jessup, New Economy Information Service, June 28, 1999In This Document: In this commentary, David Jessup takes note of the new Third Way pronouncement written by British Prime Minister Tony Blair and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder. Jessup notes that unlike other manifestos, the Blair-Schroeder document is more critical of the social democratic past than of the conservative opposition.
Related Documents:
The Blair-Schroeder Proposal: A Third Way for All? -- David Jessup
Europe's "New" Third Way -- Christian Watrin
Europe: The Third Way -- Tony Blair and Gerhard Schroeder
Most political manifestos outline a Bold Vision For The Future coupled with a ringing denunciation of the Shortcomings Of The Opposition. Not so the recent pronouncement by British Prime Minister Tony Blair and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, entitled "Europe: The Third Way / The New Middle." In it, the European leaders focus their major criticism on the mistakes of their own political tradition -- social democracy.
The list of their own past sins is long: the "imposition of equality of outcome," the "association of social democracy with conformity and mediocrity," the "disproportionate expansion of the government's reach and the bureaucracy that went with it," the elevation of rights above responsibilites resulting in rising crime and vandalism, excessive intervention of government in the economy, too much "tax and spend," ideological dogmatism, overly expensive public services, stifling of enterprise and entrepreneurial activity, excessive "reliance on deficit spending and heavy-handed state intervention," too much identification "with high taxes, especially on business," excessive welfare benefits without reciprocal obligation to work, over reliance on demand-side economic stimulus policies, imposition of rigid excessive labor costs to business.
Hmmm... Whose manifesto is this, anyway? That question grows as one pursues the list of proposals designed to atone for these mistakes. Calling for a "New Supply Side Agenda for the Left," Blair and Schroeder want to:
How do such policies differ from the supply-side agenda of the Right? Curiously, the authors don't say, other than to announce that the "past two decades of neo-liberal laissez-faire are over." Presumably, European conservatives would be less likely to spend tax money on training and transition assistance to workers, less likely to protect the environment, less likely to avoid tax competition to induce companies to move from one European county to another.
These are important differences, to be sure. But on the fundamental question of embracing global economic integration and all the "creative destruction" that comes with it, the Blair-Schroeder Third Way, despite its human face, is looking a lot like American-style Free Market Capitalism.
[Judging from the squeals of outrage over "stealing our program," many conservatives seem to agree – but not all. In a May 11, 1999, lecture at the Heritage Foundation, Professor Christian Watrin attempted to refute the argument that the third way model is a "disguised libertarian program." Watrin maintains that the starting point of third-way adherents is the collectivism (and not freedom of the individual) still present in socialist thinking: the provision of public goods; regulation of markets in the public interest; the fostering of social peace; the active development of human capital through a central role by the state in the education system, the provision of infrastructure, and the role as a prime employer in some cases, especially in ecological matters. Watrin sees the socialist devil lurking in the Third Way bushes. But from his extreme libertarian viewpoint, Watrin might find almost as much to criticize in practical mainstream conservatism.]