After the Cold War, one of the ideological works that appeared to be the most striking analysis were Fukuyama's essays, which "heralded" the "end of history" to his community.1 This was not a coincidence. Because the grand narratives adopted as their motto a historical struggle that resulted in the eternal victory of their own ideological paradigms, on a spectrum ranging from liberalism to Marxism. The collapse of the USSR and the Eastern Bloc and the liquidation of real socialism, according to some, represented an eternal victory for liberalism and liberal democracies. This neo-liberal understanding, expressed by conservative governments, on the basis of ethnic identitarianism and marketism, within the framework of North-South instead of the East-West dichotomy, kept the global north as a whole, while scattering the global south from Yugoslavia to the Caucasus and from there to the Middle East with occupation and disintegration. Micro nationalisms, ethnic-based crises, ethnic cleansing movements; Fukuyama's gilded title of the end of history was quickly exposed. While the liquidation of the Left in the USSR, Eastern Bloc, Yugoslavia and Albania gave way to identitarian policies, Europe thought it would live comfortably in its own bubble. Before we get to that point, it is useful to make this reminder. In the 1990s, after its practices during the Cold War, when Social Democracy felt relieved in the political competition with its own left, it began "initiatives" towards its own right. In this context, two of the clearest examples are the "new left" politics of Blair's Labor Party in Britain and the "new middle" discourse of the SPD in Germany. In Giddens's "third way"2, on a neo-liberal basis, social democracy, workers' rights, social struggle, public investments, public interest, balanced development, equality, freedom, solidarity, prosperity, environment and many other topics were replaced by a marketist and identitarian model that was less disturbing to capitalism. Giddens, who was also an advisor to Blair, expressed the idea that social democracy, which had left Marxism behind, would now become one with liberalism, and that a neo-liberal left would inherit the political legacy of liberal parties whose influence had diminished. It also had an impact on our country. In Turkey, which had not yet experienced social democracy, Baykal's CHP used the motto of "new left in the world, new CHP in Turkey" for a while. (During the SHP period, together with İsmail Cem, they wrote a book titled New Left3 in this vein.) Blair was fetishized in the neo-liberal left, however, especially in the 2nd Gulf War, he could not go beyond the "poodle" caricature of Bush. It is debatable what kind of mark he left on history. Because a "left initiative" was ironically revealed during the occupations. With his "new middle" discourse, Schröder replaced the labor-based class balance of social democracy with a politics that is no longer based on the working class but based on the middle class, where ideological transitions are more flexible. His political finale was interesting: he left his post as German chancellor to become chairman of Gazprom's supervisory board, saying he was not making enough money. It can be recorded as a historical farewell!!! These searches led to the meetings that started in Florence, with reference to the enlightenment process during the Bill Clinton period, and then to the establishment of the Progressive International together with liberals, where the word Socialist was left behind in its name.4
However, the vacuum created by social democracy, whose left wing has diminished and whose liberalism has come to the fore, and within Europe, especially the increasing phenomenon of immigration, anti-immigrant, xenophobia, and cultural discrimination, have seriously disrupted the comfort with which Europe looks down on the global south. While Le Pen's footsteps are being heard in France in 2027, AFD is rapidly rising in Germany, gaining superiority in state elections, and there is already Meloni in Italy. So, how similar are these political movements, described as the Far Right, to the National Socialist or Fascist political movements of the 1930s and the infrastructure of totalitarian regimes? Macron, who is in his last political term in France, came after the collapse of the center right and left in France. Although he drew an ideology-free line, he expressed a framework closer to the center right in the lanes of liberal politics as we know it. Even though it criticizes NATO from time to time and tries to protect its former colonies in the Middle East, it is eating away at the legacy of its historical background as the EU's only nuclear power. In addition, it is debatable whether Le Pen's politics after Macron will paint a picture comparable to Macron's. What is interesting is that the Far Right in Europe has one hand on US President Trump and the other hand on Russian leader Putin. Therefore, although there is a social depression similar to that of the 1930s, it is controversial what kind of political projections the increasing identity crisis and representation crisis will reveal.
At this very point, the emergence of new oppositions and challenges on the socialist/democratic socialist ground, from New York to Berlin, must be addressed in a separate framework. Mamdani's becoming the mayor of New York despite Trump, his social programs for the homeless and the poor, his calling himself a democratic socialist, his support for Palestine, his stance against Israeli expansionism; This is a serious sign for the central politicians whose positions are shaky in the West. Elif Eralp, the candidate of the Left Party, which was ahead in the Berlin state elections on September 20 and whose chances of becoming prime minister have strengthened, has also come to the fore with her stance against anti-immigration, her social rights discourse, her support for Palestine, and her attitude against Israel's superior discourse in the West; The impact created by an Indian immigrant in the USA and a Turkish immigrant in Germany with their socialist identities should be evaluated well on the basis of mass message, regardless of the performance of these policies and politicians, in an environment of perception of leftlessness.
We can clearly say that immigration and the phenomenon of immigration now determine politics in Europe. The Far Right rising on anti-immigrant sentiment, immigrant rights, and socialist movements rising within the framework of social demands should be handled within today's objective conditions. Neither today's Far Right will repeat the fascist foundation of the 1930s, nor will rising socialist movements pick up where they left off in the Cold War.
Speaking of Europe, the political center has collapsed. The CDU-SPD dilemma in Germany may now be replaced by new rivalries. The League-Socialist Party competition for the Republic in France is long gone. Although the Labor Party-Conservative dilemma continues in Britain, the rise of UKIP and the position of Scottish parties should be considered together with the separatist demands, social crisis and immigration reality.
When we look at the world map, it compares us with the yellow of Africa against the lush green geography of Europe. Green Europe, through imperialism, colonized many areas of the globe, including Africa. It seems too early to ask whether categories such as citizens/immigrants/illegal immigrants in Europe, especially those from Yellow Africa, can reposition the center in politics, especially with their positions in socialist politics, while preserving their own identities.
However, it is necessary to draw this balance sheet based on the title of the article. The Third Way attempt and the claim that ideologies are over were remembered as both premature and bankrupt mental exercises. However, it was a huge hit, so to speak, a capitalist victory that marked the end of history, and was handled with identitarian and marketist bigotry. This also spread a chaos in which religion and religion-based politics came to the fore, including the Far Right in Europe and clan, tribe, clan and armed organizations in the Middle East.
The third journey, which was politically bankrupt, was used conjuncturally in the interim period as an expression of embarrassed leftlessness in the 1990s, and went down in history with its instrumentality in this bracket. There was an attempt to liquidate the left with the left. Blair broke the ties of the Labor Party, which was founded by labor unions, with the unions, highlighted the church (he later changed the sect as well), and became a party to the US occupations.
While the remaining geography of the world (still is according to the West) is paying the price with blood and tears and new occupations, Europe will either surrender to neo-fascist movements and their reflections in its own social crisis, or new options will emerge from the left.
The world needs a new enlightenment, not a new one. However, this will not come with market gods and identitarian hucksters, but in the context of equality of citizenship, secular democracy, common law and political nation, as in our Republic founded by Ataturk.
If France, where the French revolution took place, establishes the 6th Republic with Le Pen, the European leg of the new middle age is about to be completed. Across the ocean, its other leg has become stronger with Trump.
The exit from the left in re-enlightenment should not be a third pillar, but should be libertarian, egalitarian, based on the brotherhood of people, labor-based, secular, public, social-statist, citizen-oriented, in the context of nation-states and solidarity of nations, peaceful rather than warlike, aiming for the ideal of a single human civilization based on universal values, not a conflict or clash of civilizations.
EMEK, which has been the target of degenerate neo-liberalism since the 1980s, should once again become the subject of politics and nations, and this saying should be included in the constitutions.
LABOR IS THE HIGHEST VALUE…
