By Bill White
”If I told you I thought the world was controlled by a handful of capitalists and corporate bosses, you would say I was a left-winger,” an anarchist ‘black blocker’ told me at a recent demonstration against the Afghanistan War. ”But if I told you who I though the capitalists and corporate bosses were, you’d say I was far right,” the bandana-clad youth added with a wink.
The masked gutter punk was not alone. His perspective — a broad blend of left-wing socialism and far-right nationalist and libertarian views has been slowly infiltrating both extremes of the political spectrum, particularly in the anti-globalist movement, and has been leading to a new synthesis of doctrine ”beyond left and right” that is coalescing around a number of tendencies, national anarchism, social nationalism, national bolshevism; that some are calling the fastest growing ideological movement on the fringe.
Though significantly divergent in their beliefs, these ideologies are at the core of what is being called the ”Third Position,” a collection of radical anti-capitalist, anti-globalist and anti-imperialist views that are outspoken in their rejection of the corporate state, of social democracy, of Marxism, and of Zionism.
But just as these ideologies are gaining more adherents, they are also becoming the target of more disinformation, as the extreme Old Leftists of the anti-globalist movement call conferences to attack these ideas, and as the self-righteous defenders of neo-liberalism try to force these doctrines- square peg into their round hole of ”hate” and ”fascism. Decadence is fighting back, but as the proponents of these ideas steadily resist being labeled as far right by the defenders of the neo-liberal corporate-socialist status quo, the globalist power structure has found itself in a boxing match with a body of water.
ORIGIN — THE OPPOSITION TO HITLER
”Two million Germans have been or still are guests in the cells of the Gestapo, or are or have been familiar with the delights of Dachau, Buchenwald, or Oranienburg. These two million have parents, wives, children. In other words, about ten million human beings have suffered personally from Hitler’s methods.
The German people are said to be entirely devoted to [their] Fuehrer. – No[!] -The German people want a German revolution – [they] want liberty at home – [they] want liberty abroad – [they] want peace in Germany, peace in Europe, and peace in the world.”
— Otto Strasser, ”Hitler and I” (1940)
Fascism and national socialism have been presented by the bourgeois media and those phony independent and extremist political movements that want mainstream acceptability as monolithic doctrines that governed entire countries with the unanimous consent of their people. Zionist writers have turned these representations into entire schools of thought that label whole races and classes of people, Germans or Swiss bankers for example, as ”haters” or ”anti-Semites,” holding all national or group aspirations of those people as inherently suspect, and inflicting collective punishment both on those people and their descendents in the form of endless reparations for ”crimes” that may or may not have occurred. This kind of racial and ethnic reductionism, in alliance with the mindless nihilistic hatred of slogan-shouting Marxist and Trotskyist socialism, has clouded and obscured any real understanding of the ideological tendencies within the anti-communist and anti-liberal socialist movements that developed in European the early part of the 20th Century. From this ignorance has sprung the inability of the liberal-capitalist / state-socialist left to respond to the re-emergence of these doctrines in the early 21st Century.
In the struggle to come to terms with the anti-Monarchical, Bolshevist and capitalist tendencies that swept across Eurasia like the black plague, the finest minds of Europe developed ideologies which, though semantically similar to their ruling class cousins, were radically opposed to the kind of bourgeois pragmatism which catapulted leaders like Hitler and Mussolini into the seats of government. These thinkers, like Otto Strasser, who led the remnant of the left-wing of the National Socialists in revolt against Hitler after the 1934 [check] purges, and Julius Evola, who lorded over Mussolini in his own country and who was banned from lecturing in Germany because of his seditious doctrine, have been largely ignored in the Western world until recently, as the struggle between Bolshevik communism and American centralized-capitalism dominated for fifty years the international political landscape. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the collapse of America into imperial overstretch and ideological decay, the thinkers of the world have been free to re-invent the ideas of the past v and these ideas have exploded outwards in the international globalist movement. With the Zionist Third World War against Islam now looming on the horizon, and with the government of America becoming further divorced from the decentralist and anti-imperialist inclinations of its people, an understanding of the history and doctrine of these movements has become of paramount importance.
THE BLACK FRONT
”Your racial ideas are not only a flagrant contradiction of the great mission of National-Socialism; they are calculated to bring about the disintegration of the German people.”
”What you preach is liberalism[!] There is only one possible kind of revolution, and it is not economic, or political, or social, but racial, and it will always be the same.”
— Otto Strasser (first speaker) debating Adolf Hitler (second speaker), as reported in the article ”Socialists Leave the Nazi Party,” July 4, 1930
Prior to the Nazi’s ascension of power in 1933, there had been two distinct trends within the German National-Socialist movement. The first, the right trend in the movement, developed around the alliance of Herman Goring with the German-Prussian aristocracy and the captains of German heavy industry. It is to this camp, lured by the money and the luxuries which it distributed freely to its political friends, that Hitler and his toady Goebbels came in the years before the ascension to power. Opposed to them were the German socialists, the ”left” trend in the movement, also known as the Black Front or the German Freedom Front, who formed around the Strasser brothers, Ernst Roehm and the SA, and who believed in the socialization and expropriation of the property of the aristocrats and industrialists that were supporting Hitler’s rise to power.
The difference betweens the two camps were not trivial. The right camp favored socialization v meaning confiscation into the control of the state only of those industries that behaved against the interests of the nation, or, rather, who were owned by corporations that competed with the Nazi Party’s backers or that were owned by Jews. The left was in favor of the socialization the confiscation and redistribution to the workers of all heavy industry and landed property, whether it was owned by the Germans who were funding Hitler or any of their opponents.
The two camps also disagreed on the question of nationalism and imperialism. Hitler, as early as 1920, was planning war, in alliance with Britain (he hoped), against France, for the domination of Europe, in which Germany would control the land and Britain the seas. Strasser, in contrast, advocated a German nation, freed of foreign occupation and imperialist dreams, embracing the German people without colonizing or occupying the lands of Europe’s non-German people. Hitler wanted war, and Strasser wanted peace.
Third, the two camps differed significantly on the role of the state. Hitler’s bourgeois tendencies, developed from his alliances with Germany’s ruling class, led him to embrace the essence of fascist doctrine, the idea of a corporate state that manufactured the lives of its workers as a product. The left and working class elements, however, advocated the liberty of the individual in the regulation of both their personal and economic lives, with the belief that, unimpaired by foreign doctrines and the pollution of ruling class and alien cultural control, the workers would adhere naturally to the organic tendencies towards culture that were embodied in the fundaments of their physical and spiritual being. Hitler’s Nazi state, with its total control, was viewed by the Freedom Front opposition in much the same way that Stalin’s bureaucracy was viewed by the Trotskyites as a deformed implementation of the ideal, created by a leadership who had betrayed the revolution for accommodation with the bourgeoisie.
RADICAL TRADITIONALISM AND HEATHENISM
”Imperialism … may continue to exist for hundreds or thousands of years. … Dead bodies, amorphous and dispirited masses of men, scrap material from a great history, are to be taken as the typical symbol of the end. … It is not a matter of choice — it is not the conscious will of individuals, or even that of whole classes or peoples that decides. The expansive tendency is a doom, something daemonic and intense, which grips, forces into service, and uses up … mankind.”
— Oswald Spengler, Decline of the West
As thinkers like Strasser were engaged in the practical political struggles, others, like Julius Evola, Oswald Spengler, and, later, Francis Parker Yockey, were developing the spiritual and philosophical underpinning of a new religious-historical movement, a uniquely European movement that would re-invigorate the European and Eurasian cultural soul and lead to a renewal of the European peoples and their civilization.
The idea that underlies this paradigm is that cultures, civilizations and the nations which embody them are living organisms like the people which compose them. Like organisms, these cultural aggregates have life-cycles, and go through a distinct series of stages which begin at the birth of the cultural idea, follow through its development, and lead to the death of the civilization, culture or nation when the idea has exhausted its possibilities for development in the material world. Spengler saw two distinct phases of this the first where the culture exhausts its spiritual and philosophical possibilities, and a second where it exhausts the possibilities in technology and empire that the spiritual foundation has created. Evola took a larger and essentially religious view that the entire cycle of growth and development represented a cycle of cultural degeneration that was defined by the domination of different classes v the religious, the warrior, the merchant, and the worker, in that order and which terminated in a death cycle the Kali Yaga and a final destruction, Ragna Rokkr or Armageddon, which was followed by a rebirth of the Golden Age. Yockey watered these ideas down by speculating that such a rebirth could occur outside of the natural cycle if the will of man was strong enough to intervene.
Essential to this doctrine is a rejection of both Christianity and Semitism, which, when not viewed as the actual agents of cultural destruction, are viewed as alien cultural ideals whose influence cannot be viewed as healthy to the European or Asian cultural body. Evola saw Judaism and Christianity as being the means through which the pagan Earth-worship of the destructive cultures had infiltrated the Western cultural body and introduced into Traditional cultures (cultures descended from the one race of the Golden Age which had brought culture to the world) the intellectualism and materialism which would bring about their destruction. Spengler often reflected on how one of the great cultures v the Mayan/Aztec/Central American had been destroyed before reaching the end of its natural life cycle through the actions of the Western culture and its colonialism, and Yockey continued this idea of cultures being killed during their organic development by asserting that the role of Jews and members of the Jewish culture in dominating Western cultural industries and aspects of the Western economy were killing Western culture before the time that had been naturally allotted to it. Given this analysis, the modern Third Positionist doesn’t look to Christianity as the soul of the West, but looks to pre-Christian religious identity as the key to understanding the nature of the Western soul.
This does not necessarily mean that the Third Positionist is motivated by Heathenism, Odinism, or Asatru — all variants on pre-Christian Nordic doctrine. There are really two schools of thought on this. One is that the Norse, with their warrior spirit and warrior culture, embody the ideal cultural soul of the Western man. This is an idea largely borrowed from the mainstream of Hitler-ian National Socialist thought, and is one that private remarks by Hitler, recorded by his associates, tend to indicate the Fuehrer adhered to — though publicly Hitler was pro-Christian, and his SS was involved in the cultic worship of a pseudo-Christian doctrine known as Irmin-Kristianity (which occultist Karl Maria Willigut opposed to Judaeo-Christianity). It is also one that tends to correlate with a more racist worldview that is not generally held by beyond left and right” movements. The second variant sees all of the great Eurasian cultures — Mayan, Egyptian, Greco-Roman, Norse, non-Judaeo-Christian Middle Eastern, Indian and Chinese — as being different manifestations of the same religious and cultural principle, and thus has respect for all of the pre-Christian Eurasian faiths as different manifestations of the same culture. Some Third Positionists would further expand this by saying that each people has a right to their own religion and their own culture, and that it is wrong for any religion or culture, Christianity included, to declare itself ”universal” and attempt to impose its folkways on another. But regardless of what variant on the pagan ideal the individual holds, most adherents of the doctrines are hostile to the Judaeo-Christian way of life.
HISTORY IN OUR TIME
”America … has created a ‘civilization’ that represents an exact contradiction of the ancient European tradition. It has introduced the religion of praxis and productivity; it has put the quest for profit, great industrial production, and mechanical, visible, and quantative achievements over any other interest. It has generated a soulless greatness of a purely technological and collective nature, lacking any background of transcendence, inner light, and true spirituality. America has [built a society where] man becomes a mere instrument of production and material productivity within a conformist social conglomerate.”
— Julius Evola, Revolt Against the Modern World
Much of the recent history of the ”beyond left and right” movement which comprises the modern Third Position comes from a radical tendency that broke off the reactionary, far-right, and in modern times national socialist British National Front organization in the late 1980s to form the International Third Position, which then morphed into or absorbed the National Anarchist movement, the American Front, and a variety of other organizations which are active today.
The National Front was founded in 1967 by a merger of the Racial Preservation Society, the British National Party, and the League of Empire Loyalists. The group was controversial and focused largely on anti-immigration activism throughout the 1970s, with serious opposition from both Communist and Jewish organizations. In the 1980s, though, tendencies began to develop within the National Front that were less hostile to other races and broader minded on questions of culture and national identity.
According to ex-National Front member Troy Southgate, writing on the National-Anarchist mailing list:
”By 1984-5, however, the NF had evolved into a fully-fledged National Revolutionary organisation and was advocating links with Black separatists like Louis Farrakhan, support for Libyan-style decentralisation, dialogue with Osiris Akkebala of the Pan-African International Movement and Tom Means of the American Indian Movement, the break-up of the British Isles into seven independent nations, and even support for Iran against American imperialism.”
But the changes within the group were controversial. The growing links with non-white organizations alienated a significant faction within the Front, which broke off in 1986 to form a new ”National Front” — the group which represents the core of the modern National Front organization today. The remainder of the National Front began moving to Third Position, but after the leadership of the organization began apologizing to the Jewish community for ”anti-Semitism” and promised to reform, another split occurred, and the group calling itself the ”International Third Position” brought. The remaining action, led by Patrick Harrington, abandoned the name ”National Front” for the name ”Third Way”, leaving the 1984 splinter as the ”official” National Front. Today, that same splinter confronts many of its ex-leaders, which left to form the British Nationalist Party, in a competition for being the island’s dominant National Socialist movement.
Between 1989 and 1992, the International Third Position began to abandon socialist doctrines and embrace fascist corporatism as a political and economic ideology. It allied itself with groups like Forza Nuova in Italy and the National Democratic Party in Germany, and established other branches in Romania, Poland, Scotland, Wales, Mexico, Cuba, and the United States. Its move towards fascism disturbed many of its English adherents, though, who abandoned the group in 1992 to form the English Nationalist Movement. In 1998, the splinter renamed itself the National Revolutionary Faction, and began advocating a form of radical nationalist decentralism call national anarchism, which derived from the social nationalist ideas of Otto Strasser.
These splinters and tendencies are not the only grouplet of active Third Positionist thought, however. A number of other organizations, some affiliated with that crowd, some not, have also sprung up. Observers of leftist politics can think of the British Nationalist Front as a bit like the American Socialist Worker’s Party — through its numerous splits it has produced the vast majority of the radical grouplets in the Third Position just as the SWP has split to provide most of America’s various Trotskyist organizations.
Other groups who are loosely affiliated with the National Revolutionary Faction’s international include the American Front and the Russian National Bolshevist Party — both of whom have received disproportionate attention in America as being anti-Semitic and far right organizations. The allegedly racist views of the American Front in particular have become a favorite talking point of anti-racist crusaders seeking to smear the Third Positionist movement, despite the fact those views are more an aberration among international Third Positionism than a fundamental element of the doctrine. Further, Edward Limonov, who heads the Russian National Bolshevik Party, has also faced harassment by the Russian government for various accusations of terrorism.
Another organization which has also been moving towards a third-positionist national-communist line in the past few years has been the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF). Having been the ruling party of Russia for so long, and drawing a large base of its support from ethnic Russians, the KPRF has been blending nationalistic and communist rhetoric to create a more populist approach to politics that closely resembles many Third Positionist ideologies.
This has disturbed a number of Western neo-liberal ”anti-hate” organizations, one of which, the Union of Jews of the Former Soviet Union, a group funded by a group controlled by billionaire mogul George Soros, issued the following statement in a recent press release:
”The Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF) is the largest faction in the national parliament, the State Duma, and the dominant party in many regions. … [M]any KPRF regional leaders are openly anti-Semitic, support anti-Semitic media (Bryansk, Oryol), or give direct or indirect support to anti-Semitic groups or individuals. … With the rise of extremist nationalist ideology in post-Soviet Russia, a new form of Communist anti-Semitism has emerged as some members of the KPRF have begun using anti-Semitic rhetoric borrowed from nationalist extremists to drum up political support. The influence of the Red-Brown alliance within the KPRF is clearly on the rise.”
THE THIRD POSITION AND ISLAM
”Islam, which originated among the Semitic races – also consisted of the Law and Tradition, regarded as a formative force, to which the Arab stocks of the origins provided a purer and nobler human material that was shaped by a warrior spirit. The Islamic law (shariah) is a divine law; its foundation, the Koran, is thought of as God’s very own word (kalam Allah) as well as a nonhuman work and an ”uncreated book” that exists in heaven ab eterno. Although Islam considers itself the ”religion of Abraham – it is nevertheless true that (a) it claimed independence from both Judaism and Christianity; (b) the Kaaba, with its symbolism of the center, is a pre-Islamic location and has even older origins that cannot be dated accurately; (c) in the esoteric Islam tradition, the main reference point is al-Khadir, a popular figure conceived as superior to an pre-dating the biblical prophets (Koran 18:59-81).
In early Islam the only form of asceticism was action, that is, jihad, or ”holy war”; this type of war, at least theoretically, should never be interrupted until the full consolidation of the divine Law has been achieved. Finally, Islam presents a traditional completeness, since the shariah and the sunna, that is, the exoteric law and tradition, have their complement not in vague mysticism, but in full-fledged initiatory organizations (turuq) that are categorized by an esoteric teaching (tawil) and by the metaphysical doctrine of the Supreme Identity (tawhid). In these organizations, and in general in the shia, the recurrent notions of the masum, of the double perogative of the isma (doctrinal infallibility), and of the impossibility of being stained by any sin (which is the perogative of the leaders, the visible and invisible Imams and the mujtahid), lead back to the line of an unbroken race shaped by a tradition at a higher level than both Judaism and the religious beliefs that conquered the West. ”
-Julius Evola, Revolt Against The Modern World
Most interesting in the context of recent events is the strong links that have developed between the various organizations in the Third Positionist movement and the anti-Zionist and national liberation struggles of the Arab people and the Islamic world. In the words of the founding documents of the Third Positionist collective:
Jewish people have no racial, cultural or historical claim to the land of Palestine. The so-called state of Israel was erected on the murdered corpses of innocent Arabs, and has been maintained by systematic state terrorism. We recognize the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people. Peace is a consequence of justice, and there will be no true peace in the Middle East until the Palestinians are given the justice they truly merit. As a guiding principal in such matters, we recognize the Arab world must be supported against the Zionist lobby.
Such strong statements have led to a growing interest in a variety of radical Palestinian liberation groups, from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine to the Islamic Association for Palestine. But more akin to the principles of Third Positionism are the guiding ideals of Libyan leader Muammar Al Qadhafi’s Green Revolution, as embodied in his Green Book:
”Political struggle that results in the victory of a candidate with, for example, 51 per cent of the votes leads to a dictatorial governing body in the guise of a false democracy, since 49 per cent of the electorate is ruled by an instrument of government they did not vote for, but which has been imposed upon them. Such is dictatorship. This is the reality of the political systems prevailing in the world today. They are dictatorial systems and it is evident that they falsify genuine democracy.”
Qadhafi’s views are a combination of a critique of modern democracy combined with a prescription for a superior form of democracy, based on decentralized government, workers councils, and a truer understanding of democratic principle like freedom of religion and freedom of the press. His Green Book, which is claimed to have inspired a number of decidedly undemocratic revolutions, such as Charles Taylor’s struggle in Liberia and Fonda Sankoh’s arm-amputating rebellion in Sierra Leone, is a prominent feature on many Third Positionist sites, and supporters of his Jamahiri movement (http://www.mathaba.net) are often found conversing with Third Positionist in their groups and mailing lists.
This collaboration with anti-Zionist elements of all stripes, and the belief that all people have the right to their own system of government, even if it is different from or a rejection of Western ideals as long as it does not make imposition on Western ideals runs smack in the face of American ruling class corporate universalism and neo-conservative imperialism, which demands that all people reduce themselves to consumers of Western material goods. This conflict has caused growing protest against Third Positionism among those elements of the Western ruling class tasked to the suppression of political dissent, and has caused some in the traditional Left to begin laying plans for the destruction of this competitor.
NEO-LIBERAL HATE AND RESISTANCE
”More and more, people on both ends of the traditional political spectrum – are finding that their world views overlap. They are opposed to what are seen as the homogenizing forces of globalism. They despise capitalism, with its tendency to concentrate wealth and to make people and economies more and more alike. They pine for nations of peasant-like folk tied closely to the land and to their neighbors. They fight for a pristine environment, a land unsullied by corporate agriculture and urbanization. They detest man-centered philosophies, seeing animals as no less important than humans. They reject rationalism in favor of a kind of mystical spirituality. Above all, these mainly young people — in some ways, the descendants of the ”back-to-the-land” hippies of the 1960s — favor decentralization.
”[T]hese ideas have had a real impact on the American racist rock scene.”
— Southern Poverty Law Center, Neither Left Nor Right, Intelligence Report
Despite their typically ridiculous non sequitur mode of thinking, the Southern Poverty Law Center, a group which turns profits by suing small far right organizations who lack the financial resources to defend themselves, has been leading the charge to expand the definition of hater and extremist to include not only Third Positionist doctrines but also traditional Trotskyist and Anarchist left-wingers. In this, they have cooperated with the ADL and Bnai Brith, who have press released numerous concerns of late about anti-Zionism, which they equate with anti-Semitism, among the American and Canadian campus based student left. Both groups, seeing their usual enemies — the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke, the Aryan Nations, and the like — largely exhausted financially and with little left to attack, have been desperately trying to justify their existence with these ad hominem expansions of the war on hatred though there is some indication that the larger world is not buying it. As long time left-wing anarchist activist P. Milstein wrote in his recent essay The Enemy of Our Enemy: The Southern Poverty Law Center -Bad Jackets- Anarchists:
”Are anarchists now the allies and recruits for the latest trend in white neo-fascism. That is the amazing Big Lie being put out by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), on its popular civil rights website. … This attack on revolutionary anarchism is more than a simple mistake, more even than just pro-government propaganda that needs to be shot down. It’s a slipping of the mask, exposing the contradiction of pro-capitalist ”anti-racism” in America.”
What kind of ”anti-racist” organization would do all this? The Southern Poverty Law Center itself and its founder-director, Morris Dees, while a public relations and fund-raising powerhouse, has for years been viewed by many activists with misgivings. It appears that SPLC is the model of capitalist ”anti-racism”–that is, it functions like a business with government connections using anti-racism as a commodity. And far from being a critic of the racist system, it is a small gear in the machinery of capitalist hegemony and institutional repression.
Some though, on the anarchist and traditional left have decided they are going to take on the issue of National Anarchism, Synthesism, and Third Positionism in Europe on their own, and have launched a continent-wide conference on the issue for early January 2002. In her preliminary call for an anti-Nationalist-Anarchist, Anti-Synthesis conference to be held in Warsaw, Poland, International Workers of the World (Wobbly) member Laure Akai wrote that she would be inviting speakers to discuss this fascist [sic] threat:
The conference will be devoted to an exploration of theories, groups and people associated with the ”Third Way,” Nationalist Anarchism, the New Right and others trying to form a synthesis between left and right radicalism. We would like to have 7-8 one hour presentations on different groups/ideologies/ideologues, some historic background and also time to discuss strategies and the publication of a book or journal dedicated to debunking this phenomenon.
Since the conference was announced in early August, however it doesn’t appear to have drawn much interest. Debates between left and right anarchism have been occurring within the anarchist movement for decades, and few but the most dedicated ideologues have ever expressed an interest in trying to drive either side out of the movement regardless of the fact that neither side has either the ability or the authority to do so. In a way, Akai’s totalitarian desire to define for others what political ideologies are permissible is exactly the kind of ruling class conformist impulse that the ”beyond left and right” movement is attempting to address.
Southgate, one of the targets of the conference, seemed very unconcerned about it, and when asked for information, said that he wasn’t even sure the conference had drawn enough attention to continue:
”Information is pretty hard to come by! All we had was a lone message on the Anti-National Anarchist list” he stated.
As anti-globalist and anti-capitalist sentiments spread among all people, left and right, who are opposed to the internationalist’s New World Order and their anti-working class imperialism, it is inevitable that divergent tendencies, united by a common opposition, will find themselves engaging in greater exchanges of political and cultural ideas, and that this exchange will lead to a new synthesis of doctrines which will redefine the paradigm in which social and economic struggle is conducted in the 21st Century. Key to this is the role played by the so-called Third Positionist movement which, by rejecting Capitalism, Communism, Social Democracy and Hiterlian National Socialism, seeks to find a true working people’s socialism that accommodates unique cultural and ethnic characters while not ending support to imperialism, ethnic supremacy, or world-destroying wars.
Standing in stark contrast to this are the movements of the international ruling class, whether the American Oil Barons, the Zionists, or the New World Order democratic socialists, which seek to strip working people of their political and economic liberties in order to shape them in the image of the new man. These movements, which demand as part of their doctrine global domination and the destruction of all cultures and traditions which oppose them, have created by their evil deeds the reaction that will stand in the way of their phony progress and bring their system to its knees. Working people today, just as the working people of a century ago, have no use for wars that bring profit to a handful of elite at the expense of the lives of the masses, and as working people see how the ideologies of the past failed to bring about their enlightenment, they are seeking out news ideas in a new field of politics that has moved beyond left and right.