Introduction, Democrats In Drag, Part 1
On November 11, 1994, in a post-election victory speech, Republican House member Newt Gingrich revealed to Congress what his Contract With America, his Republican Revolution was all about. (1) He called it “The Third Way,” a progressive movement he would interchangeably refer to as the Third Way, the Third Wave, or Conservative Futurism in speech after speech from that day forward. To understand what Congressmen Gingrich meant by that he recommended the reading of two books, the first, “The Third Wave” by ex-Marxist Alvin Toffler, and the second, “The Tragedy of American Compassion” by ex-Marxist Marvin Olasky, founding father of George W. Bush’s, “Compassionate Conservatism,” and the editor in chief of World Magazine.
What is the Third Way/Wave? What is its child Compassionate Conservatism? The early history of the catchphrase sends us our first disturbing hints.
Technology, Sovereignty, and The Third Wave
To most ordinary people, the technological revolution is one of those matter-of-fact blessings and spoils of life in modern America. Few of us, then, give technology a second thought . . . except when it fails. Yet all of us depend on it, enjoy it, and forever demand its ready medley of gizmos and gadgets to be newer, better, and more distinctive than ever before.
Technology’s job should be to make our work easier and quicker, our leisure more fun and comfortable, and our liberty more secure — generally, it has. Thanks to the creative fire laissez-faire has fanned — and continues to fan — in a nation where public virtue and the rule of law still reign, there are always plenty of deep-thinking inventors and deep-pocketed entrepreneurs eager and able to supply the instant gee-whiz wants and needs of millions of freemen and freewomen.
On the other hand, to the unordinary, or is that extraordinary, that is, to that odd creature called the Legislator, technology is an unmanageable, out-of-control threat which has forced and will yet force Americans and other free people to contemplate the redefinition of such things as the republican form of government, private property and the individual and collective right to self-defense, and think of this too: the elimination of such antiquated oddities as neutrality, national sovereignty, and religious fundamentalism. A remarkably implosive view of the explosive potential of technological growth for good!
But then legislators prefer controlling rather than liberating things and people, don’t they?
The painful truth about legislators and control is this: the I-need-to-control-people-syndrome cuts across party lines, afflicting both Democrats and Republicans alike. Both from the left and from the right we find politicians aplenty who feel ‘compelled’ to flee from the commonsense conclusion that technology can and should be utilized to better protect our God-given rights and our hard-won sovereignty. Rather than stand up and thoughtfully, dutifully put liberty first, they run and seek psychological cover in a progressive wannabe philosophy called the ‘Third Wave’ or ‘Third Way,’ – a world outlook that has the outward markings of everything new and progressive, but the inner workings of everything old and repressive.
The Third Way/Wave may sound new and innocuous to many, but its founders include such earlier notables as Plato, Karl Marx and Adolf Hitler – certainly not the best crew for men and women sworn to defend our Constitution to turn to for inspiration.
Plato’s Third Wave
The Greek philosopher Plato was the first person that we know of to use the term ‘third wave,’ which he did in his pro-communist work, The Republic (some say it was a satire on Communism). Plato called the “third wave” that “largest and most dangerous [wave of all]” wherein the pro-communist philosopher king overthrows the existing order either by smooth persuasion or by brute force. The Third Wave was the transitional phase from any form of government, free or otherwise, to total statism under the leadership of an elite class of individuals called “philosopher kings.” (2)
Setting the standard for Third Wavers and Third Wayers today, Plato didn’t call his revolutionary plan for tyranny ‘tyranny.’ Who would? Rather, he cloaked every item of revolutionary change in more palatable terms like “justice,” or “the Heavenly ideal,” or “the pursuit of the good,” or “the love of truth.” He believed in and practiced double-talk. So much so that even today Plato succeeds in convincing casual readers that they are mulling over a Judeo-Christian appeal to virtue. A hard look at Plato’s definition of virtue reveals something else, however. Virtue, he taught, is whatever sustains or brings about the ideal city. And such an ideal city was his! Communist, through and through.
The ‘Virtuous’ Aims of Plato’s Third Wave
Consider Plato’s list of virtues:
I. Private property must be abolished, the wealthy hated, and their wealth redistributed by state mandate. (3)
II. Children belong to, and are born to serve, the state. The influence of parents is noxious and disruptive to the interest of the state; therefore, every child should be raised in government nurseries, far from home, without knowledge of who his or her parents are and without the parents having knowledge of who their offspring are. Every child becomes the common property of every parent in the city. Every parent has the collective duty to watch over them. (4)
III. Private education, like traditional parenting, is at the very headwaters of falsehood and social strife. It must be eliminated and replaced by a closely monitored state school system. (5)
IV. Old values, passed down through song, history and children’s storybooks, are equally a source of trouble. These should be rewritten to discredit and erase the old virtues and to exalt and enthrone the new. (6)
V. Frivolous children’s games make for foolish children. New games should be developed that emphasize law and order. (7)
VI. Private industry is self-serving. The state has a moral obligation to move toward the absolute control of all industry for the benefit of the whole. (8)
VII. Class mobility is a revolutionary idea that threatens the stability of the state and the pre-eminence of true philosophy. A strict caste system and the elimination of career choice is the answer. (9)
VIII. Talent must never be allowed to wander or be wasted. Early on, children must be identified and channeled by the state for the benefit of the state into careers selected by the state — with only a “few” promising students selected for career or class crossover. (10)
IX. Equality is preposterous and dangerous, but useful during the Third Wave. During this phase extreme views on equality are to be promoted by the state and by wise opportunists in order to – all the more quickly – overthrow the existing order. (11)
X. Under the guise of equality women ought to be exploited in the same way: first to foment “class war” during the Third Wave (women’s roles are reversed to men’s); next, to be promptly put into their place as part of a “community of women” to be shared collectively by male guardians, war heroes, and rulers for pleasure or offspring. (12)
XI. Selective breeding is beneficial to the state (13), as are the legalization and encouragement of recreational sex and rape across class lines.
XII. Unwanted babies, inferior babies, deformed babies (14) and the adult handicapped are an unnecessary drag on the prosperity and well-being of society. They should be left to die. Unproductive adults, likewise, should be terminated. (15)
XIII. Homosexuality is morally acceptable, and homosexual rape of lower-class males and boys is a right of rulers, guardians and war heroes. (16)
XIX. Only a very few men are foreordained to understand life and the higher good; all the rest are the equivalent of dumb sheep. A few “wise” ones should be appointed “philosopher kings,” even “saviors” by the state and given absolute power to control every facet of the helplessly lost lives of the masses. (17)
XX. Absolute loyalty to the government is vital for the success and safety of society. Thus, the establishment of a state-sanctioned KGB-like network is an essential good. Citizens and leaders must be watched and intentionally goaded into committing crimes against the state, into taking advantage of sexual opportunities, and into being tried by every method imaginable in order to weed out those who are not loyal and not fit for duty from those who are. (18)
XXI. Wealth is not essential to the safety of the state. When at war with free states, the enemy will display economic superiority — but not to fear: their wealth is their weakness and can and will be used against them. The divide and conquer class warfare tactic is the choice of the virtuous. (19)
XXII.Lastly, virtue rejects troublemaking democracy (pure or direct democracy) as an end, yet shrewdly identifies it as the quickest, surest route to promoting the communist view of equality of ends. (20) During the transitional phase, the virtuous reformer will utilize democracy to:
i)Degenerate traditional morality and foster fierce intolerance against it.
ii)Lead the dumb masses (like “dumb asses”) by the nose to trample on each other’s rights in the blind pursuit of their own supposed rights.
iii)Legitimize the government’s “creeping into houses” through the creation of “new” rights which must be monitored.
iv)Create moral chaos, mob and factional spirit, revolution (21) and anarchy.
v)Eventually bring about such a violent state of uncertainty and fear that the people will, out of necessity, vote themselves the most absolute of tyrannies, (22) that of the democratic king, in order to restore order, peace and security. (23, 24)
These were the ultimate goals, the communist goals, of Plato’s Third Wave, the place where all this Third Wave/Third Way business begins.
Marx’s Three Waves of History
The next Third Waver we will consider was modern communism’s hired hack and egotistical founder, Karl Marx.
Marx, like his forebears of the 18th century communist cabal known as the Illuminati, invented nothing new. He stole heavily from Plato’s “Republic” without due credit, and then “borrowed” lock, stock and barrel from Hegel’s Godless dialectic view of history, Aristotle’s quantum leap view of evolution, and Plato’s cynical conception that the source of all law, morality and religion is simply the strong and the rich erecting protectionist walls around their property and power. This was not new. It was strictly cut and paste.
It was also really dark stuff. All man cares about is money, comfort, power, and sex. Meanwhile, everyone exploits everyone: the government in collusion with the moneyed class exploits the citizen worker, the husband exploits the wife, the parent exploits the child, the priest exploits the parishioner, the majority exploits the minority.
But the only one who doesn’t exploit anyone is the exploited one. He, she, or it becomes the “holy” class which must bind together to overthrow society’s greedy brutes and lead mankind into a millennium of peace. These exploited masses deserve a reparation, it seems, with one catch – but don’t tell them this; they are too stupid to figure this out themselves; they must be dragged into the light by the illumined one, the exalted communist, really the only one who is intelligent and moral according to the Marxist definition of morality. This is Plato’s “The Cave” at it again. (25)
As for the promised millennium of peace, there is an unpleasant blip along the way called the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. That’s when, at the end of the third wave, capitalism (the first two waves are slavery and feudalism) (26), the exploitees get to take out their ‘justifiable revenge’ on the exploiters, raining bloody horror on them until every last vestige of private property and belief in private property are swept from the earth.
Then, even though their hands are drenched in blood, poof! the proletariat turn into saints, government disbands, and those who were smart and moral enough to survive live happily ever after.
It’s a dull oversimplification of world events. There are three waves: slavery, feudalism and capitalism. And three waves within the last wave: the Industrial Revolution, the centralization of the world’s credit, and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.
All these threes!
Technology plays a critical role in all of this triple wave making. Of the three private property phases of economic history all of them supposedly arose and were terminated, in part, because of the unforeseen convergence of new forms of technology or methods of production with the existing economic order.
Primitive communal man moved into the first economic phase with the invention of tools, which led to specialization and trade, and eventually to private ownership. The stronger private property owners, selfish and greedy, then enslaved the rest to secure their booty. Thus, the cause of the first wave: slavery.
Later on in Marx’s third wave, the invention of machines, factories and assembly lines led to big cities, great fortunes and the end of wave two’s feudalism – while newer, better forms of mass production to follow would lead to international business, globally centralized credit (27) and as night follows day the workers of the world uniting to overthrow their oppressive overseers in the final phase of the third wave.
Just like modern Third Wavers and Wayers, Marx believed man was powerless against changes in technology and the inevitable march of history, that covetous capitalists who opposed his plan were enemies to public safety, that the last transition – Plato-like – was the most dangerous and violent of all, and, interestingly enough, he taught that communists ought to be “compassionate” enough to intervene, guide the agency-bereft masses, and expedite the revolution lest the blood flow too thickly. It all sounds too familiar.
In the last analysis, Marx’s revolution, like Plato’s, exploits the poor as a strategy to invoke class warfare, but, as Lenin admitted, is “all about power,” (Get Quote From You Can Trust the Communists to be Communists) or as Lenin he observed in response to the Soviet problem with weak-minded socialist who actually believed in the coming utopia: “They just don’t get it . . . the Dictatorship of the Proletariat,” that brutal transitional phase, “will never end.”
So goes Third Waver Number Two.
Adolf Hitler’s Third Way
Hitler was number three, and who should be surprised that tyrants and tyrant wannabes should mimic each other. In a 1945 German National Socialist German Workers Party (the official name of the Nazi Party) birthday address, Hitler condemned “exploitive capitalism and murderous bolshevism,” identifying his party’s movement as a third way between these two “extremes.” (28)
Walking in Hitler’s footsteps today one of Europe’s major neo-Nazi “White Power” movements refers to itself as the “Third Position” – again a half way house between communism and laissez-faire capitalism, a key element of modern third way theology. (29)
It’s the safe middle-ground ploy, the one dominating Republican Party thinking today. That spot in the middle of a lion’s cage where blind partisans sit disarmed, bludgeoned, bloodied, bruised and blindfolded, and recite in unison “It’s safe! It’s safe! It’s safe!”
But there’s more to it than just that. Fascism makes for one of the best case studies on the modern third wave, both economically and politically.
Economically, fascism is but a form of socialism. As communism in theory is complete state ownership of the means of production, fascism is its more practical sister and dialectical friend. Typically, it features state majority ownership of major industry and utilities, heavy regulation and/or “government partnerships” of smaller businesses, and laissez-faire nickel and dime operations. But in truth it’s all on an as-needed-for-the-revolution basis. The government is always ultimately in control and can eradicate any supposed private enterprise at any time.
A “privately” owned press exists, for example, but the competition is not one of ideas but of markets. Thus, opposition to the state by the press, except within prescribed boundaries, is an intolerable and dangerous business. Private scientific development, another example, is held in check via block grants (a far more effective tactic than straightforward totalitarianism). The bottom line: Fascism embraces much of Plato and Marx but utilizes different, perhaps, superior methods of control;—for all the while it lets citizens think they have a safe amount of freedom.
Politically, Hitler’s fascism offers four other prominent features as major players in today’s Third Way.
I. A subtle or open rejection of majority government. Hitler said his “doctrine” was “people and country,” and he accepted the idea of a democratic election (to get into power), but he rejected “decision by the majority” and demanded “absolute authority” for the executive after the elections. (30) A bit of Hobbes, a bit of Marxian minority rule as well. The minority was just different this time: Aryans and Nazis. The masses were inherently dumb, too, for Hitler taught that they don’t want self-rule, but only to be led.
II. The decentralization of power. Not to be confused with American federalism, but marketed as such. American federalism gives state and local units complete sovereignty over delegated powers, or in other words a duel sovereignty. Third Way fascist decentralization creates local units of power which are still accountable to the central authority.
Hitler’s brand of decentralization gave general guidelines and layers of central check systems on those periphery units; however, within those stipulations (such as fierce loyalty to the party) he granted peripheral leaders ruthless autonomous power even in competition with other agencies.
It’s Plato and Marx’s self-fulfilling prophecy of ‘the strong survive,’ providing a new pool of brutal leaders for the government. (31) It also creates a loyal cadre of men trapped by fear of reprisal for their brutality, who in protection of their own self-interest will feel inclined to sustain their corrupt party and its brutality to the bitter end.
Decentralization serves other political purposes as well. By pretending to be the equivalent of federalism, it creates a front for the outside world, as if to say, ‘we have local government and democracy,’ ‘we have weakness and division.’ Hitler used this ruse in the foreign aid game, as do the communists today.
III. A double-talk rejection but endorsement of internationalism. Hitler rejected the existing international community in favor of extreme nationalism because of the punishment of Germany under the Versailles Treaty, but favored internationalism when it benefited Germany. Further, he viewed expansion into the territories of Europe and Asia, the springing forth of “national offshoot[s] for centuries” and the requisite disarmament of all neighbors on Germany’s “frontiers” as the right and destiny of Germany. (32)
Fundamentally, if we replace racist overtones with the elitist views of today’s establishment, there really is no difference in the long run between Hitler’s racist Third Way “nationalism” and today’s new world order plan for an international civil society. Call imperialism what you like: a Eurasia with Germanic hegemony, a worldwide Aryan-led Utopia (and he spoke of Utopia), or a disarmed world “safe for Democracy” under an all-powerful United Nations: it’s all the same.
IV. The strategic injection of state-sponsored religious fervor into politics. In “Mein Kampf” Hitler writes: “The future of [the] movement is conditioned by the fanaticism, even more the intolerance, with which its adherents present it as the only right one.” (33)
The problem with religious fervor when joined with the power of the state is that the worship of God and the love of one’s fellow man are replaced with the worship of the state and the love of the collective. Tyrants, even communists, have learned that religion is a tough nut to crack. So the Third Way answer is: If you can’t beat ’em, pretend to join ’em, and watch how eagerly they volunteer to do your bidding in exchange for subsidies.
Thus, just like their talk about decentralization and democracy, Third Way proponents today talk of national “service,” “compassionate” conservatism, “faith-based” subsidies, and moral, effective “partnerships” with cash for conversion.
The origins of the catchphrase Third Way, Third Wave or Third Position go back to Plato, Marx and Hitler. Selecting such an old, tyranny-laden term for a modern progressive movement was an unfortunate slip of the tongue; but as the chapters which follow will demonstrate, it’s not just what is in a name, but what is in the ideology of that name today which leads one to suspect that, perhaps, the choice was not made in ignorance.
Steve Farrell is one of the original pundits at Silver Eddy Award Winner, NewsMax.com (1999–2008), the author of the highly praised inspirational novel Dark Rose, and Founder & Editor In Chief of The Moral Liberal.
1. Gingrich, Newt and Armey, Dick. “Contract With America.” United States of America: Times Books, Random House, 1994, p. 186. See also Congressional Record, November 11, 1994.
2. Plato. “Great Dialogues of Plato.” New York and Scarborough, Ontario: Mentor Books, 1956, pp. 271, 296-300.
3. Ibid. pp. 219, 262-263.
4. Ibid. pp. 221, 258, 255, 341.
5. Ibid. pp. 258, 260.
6. Ibid. p. 222.
7. Ibid. p. 222.
8. Ibid. p. 219.
9. Ibid. p. 233.
10. Ibid. p. 233.
11. Ibid. pp. 220, 250, Chapter VIII.
12.Ibid. pp. 247, 249, 250, 258-260.
13. Ibid. pp. 257-260.
14. Ibid. pp. 257-260.
15. Ibid. pp. 209, 267.
16. Ibid. pp. 258-260.
17. Ibid. pp. 142, 224-225, 227, 240, 249, 261.
18. Ibid. pp. 213-214.
19. Ibid. p. 220.
20. Ibid. p. 242.
21. Ibid. p. 356.
22. Ibid. pp. 361-363, 369.
23. Ibid. p. 363.
24. Ibid. p. 369.
25. Ibid. pp. 312-320.
26. Hoover, J. Edgar. “A Study of Communism.” New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc., 1962, pp. 38-41.
27. Foster, William Z. “Toward a Soviet America.” Balboa Island, California: 1961, pp. 171-172. See Also Marx, Karl, Communist Manifesto, Section 1 and Plank 5.
29. See “The International Third Position.” http://www.itp.org. See also The American Third Position at http://3rd.org/intro.html.
30. Hitler, Adolf. “Great Books: Twentieth Century Series: Mein Kampf.” New York: Wm. H. Wise & Co., 1941, p. 16.
31. Laski, Harold. See His Work “National Socialism” for a full workup on fascism in Germany. Laski’s perspective is pro-communist, anti-capitalist, but his book is penetrating, nonetheless, if you can wade through the occasional outbursts of anti-capitalist bias.
32. Hitler, pp. 12-13, 18-19.
33. Ibid. pp. 15-16.