*Correcting Historical Misunderstanding
The concept of the “third way”, which has recently been discussed in the CHP, is presented by some circles as if it were a new party formation or a political engineering maneuver. However, this concept is rooted in the economic and social model outlined by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. The discussions in the CHP are not a search for a new political route, but an effort to remember and update Turkey's vision of development and social justice.
Atatürk also emphasized the following on this issue:
“For the welfare of our people, the economy is a state policy; we need a system guided not only by the free market but also by the state.”
Atatürk's Economic Vision: State and Private Sector Balance
Atatürk emphasized that economic independence was as vital as political independence. Neither a fully capitalist free market nor a socialist model of nationalization was suitable for Turkey. Instead, Atatürk proposed a “third way” in which the state took an active role in the economy, supporting public investment and the private sector in a balanced way.
This model included an economic approach that prioritized production, industrialization and employment. State investments in strategic sectors such as textiles, iron and steel, energy and transportation were the basis of economic independence and national security. Atatürk's vision was based on production, labor and the welfare of the people, not just capital and rent.
One of Atatürk's aphorisms is as follows:
“The happiness of our nation is possible with an economy based on production and hard work.”
“Third Way” Debates in CHP
The “third way”, which is back on the agenda today in the CHP, is a modern interpretation of historical heritage. The aim is not to establish a new party, but to recall and implement the economic vision that Ataturk pointed out, which put production and labor at the center.
It is a model prioritizing social justice, economic independence and production. While the state plays a stabilizing and guiding role, the private sector is supported and production and employment are prioritized. This approach is still a valid and necessary development model for today's Turkey.
Historical Perspective Against Misperceptions
“When misinterpreted, the ”third way" can be perceived as a temporary political maneuver. However, the CHP's stance on this issue is a strategic step towards embracing the historical legacy and securing Turkey's development path. It is the application of Atatürk's goals of economic independence and social justice to today's Turkey.
In another quote, Atatürk said:
“Economy is the power of the nation; independence and development are only possible through production.”
Conclusion: Loyalty to Atatürk's Legacy
The “third way” being discussed in the CHP is not a search for a new party, but the application of the founding ideals of the Republic to modern Turkey. It is a concrete, visionary step towards economic independence and social justice while remaining loyal to the historical legacy. The CHP's stance is a strategy that aims to ensure Turkey's development on the axis of production, employment and justice, not just economic growth.
The concept of the third way is historically a vision to modernize social democracy and achieve economic balance. However, some within the CHP are using this concept as a historically detached buzzword and getting caught up in the excitement of “we will form a new party, we will find a new path”. Detached from the historical context, this approach carries neither ideological depth nor political responsibility; it is merely a reflection of the search for figurative heroes and short-term populism.
History makes a note not to forget the perpetrators of this misreading: Those who interpret the concept according to their whims, without understanding its roots, will be recorded as the pioneers of political shame. The third way is a historical vision: “the excitement of forming a new party” is a historical blunder.
Social and historical analysis shows that the liberation of a nation does not depend on figurative heroes or uniform economic models that ignore countries' own socio-economic situations; in the case of Turkey, Atatürk emerged as the main actor of national independence and development. Therefore, national development and social progress can only be achieved by understanding and guided by his ideas and principles.