Question : Why do Progressives hate the 3rd Way?
I'll give you a real answer to that and why your wife is wrong.
First and foremost we need to answer the question of what Neoliberalism is.
Neoliberalism is put simply a movement towards complete market deregulation with a cover of liberalism. Things like arguing for opening up the labor market to globalism on the basis that allowing our corporations to exploit the laxity of third world labor laws would help lift them out of poverty. And while that is true to a certain extent, what ended up happening is that they've destroyed local labor markets and heavily exploited and polluted those countries in exchange for making the powerful even richer.
Neoliberalism ultimately employs liberal aesthetics as justification for exploitation and market deregulation. The "Free Market" is traditionally considered a Republican thing but is primarily carried out by Democrats. Most of our important protections and regulations were undone by Democrats with things like NAFTA opening up the labor markets (and destroying the Midwestern economy) and the repeal of things like Glass-Steagall (allowing consolidation and monopolization of finance and banking which subsequently led to the Wall Street crash of 2008), among many other things.
Capitalism is obsessed with the idea of endless growth and profits. The planet having finite resources makes that a fantasy, but that doesn't stop Capitalism from trying. In order to have endless growth you must continue increasing your production capacity. That requires an equivalent amount of increase in resources and labor. A closed market means you are limited to domestic capacity of resources and labor.
Enter Neoliberalism. It's not so much that it is a more liberal take on markets, so much as it is the complete absence of one. There is no desire for any sort of structure or regulation in Neoliberalism, so markets manifest as an American Libertarian's wet dream. And that permissiveness to the point of throwing all caution to the wind is ideal for Capitalism as it means foreign markets are now on the table, or rather, foreign resources and labor are on the table.
That's why Neoliberalism cucked Conservatism as Capitalism's favorite steward. The permissiveness of Neoliberalism has allowed Capitalism to exploit the labor and resources of other countries, done through globalizing the labor supply and endless war and imperialism, while providing moral cover by wrapping it in liberal aesthetics. Conservatism's closed and regulated markets are ultimately too constraining for what Capitalism wants to do. Thus the cultural aesthetics of Conservatism that have dominated America for decades have very quickly turned to the diversity and permissiveness of liberalism in just a matter of years.
But, as has become so thoroughly evident, these liberal aesthetics are superficial. What's actually happened is not applying left-wing values to Capitalism, but simply broadening who can exploited and sharing the suffering equally among the world. Capitalism is inherently exploitive and Conservative Capitalism kept that exploitation to a few specific groups (non-white nations through white supremacy). Neoliberalism keeps the white supremacy and spreads that exploitation to everyone, including the domestic. Thus everyone but the small few Neoliberalism serves loses and life becomes a zero sum game.
Because ultimately Neoliberalism is not an ideology. It is the shell, or perhaps the absence of one. Ideology simply put is a collection of principles and values on a particular framework. Conservatism is an ideology centered around tradition, protectionism, and uniting people under a shared mythos (religion, culture, etc). Liberalism is an ideology centered around freedom through secularism, individuality, and uniting people under universal needs and mutual interests. Both fall under a broader left/right spectrum that has various shades of their respective lenses.
Neoliberalism is completely outside of that. It has no want or need of principles, morals, or values nor does it fight for causes or beliefs; because at its core Neoliberalism is a movement for career advancement and self-promotion. You see this in their rhetoric towards Progressives over their "purity tests" and "unwillingness to compromise" and general perceived dogma. What the criticisms ultimately boil down to is that morals, principles, and values are merely obstacles in the way of their goals and that the end justifies the means, so they ultimately resent Progressives for holding them to their self-professed beliefs in a way that doesn't let Neoliberals drop them as it becomes inconvenient to their careerism.
Neoliberalism is ultimately a void of ideology, morals, principles, values, causes, and really anything that humans use to relate to society and the world around them. It is fundamentally anti-human and rejects the concept of politics itself. It is completely incoherent in what it professes to stand for or be about (ask Democratic leadership what they stand for and they are unable to answer) and it has yet to actually produce anything or prove that it is anything other than an abstraction that is completely disconnected from any actual relation to movements or society.
Enter Biden and "Third Way" Democrats. They are the original carriers and harbingers of Neoliberalism which has completely infected the entire Democrat body. As you'll hopefully be seeing soon, Biden's entire career has been about this exact type of careerism and self-promotion at the expense of our institutions. Biden has no want or desire to engage in ideology or be bound by principles or morals, has no interest in furthering any cause outside of his own self-promotion, and his entire career has been a corporate stooge entirely because he views politics as a vehicle for self-promotion and not for ideological causes.
That's why Democrats suffer so much whiplash: Neoliberals aren't tied to any one cause or ideology and they just go with the political trends of the time. That's how our "lesser of two evils" can go from being very Law and Order authoritarians in the 80s-90s with their crime bills and "super predators" to religious moral panicking over gays with the Defense of Marriage Act and the like in the 90s-00s to progressive diverse reverse-racists that want to eradicate the patriarchy and white supremacy even though they just elected Joe Biden out of dozens of gay female black brown and Jew candidates in Current Year. And no doubt they will pivot back to Law and Order when the social unrest ramps up in the coming years.
Biden and his ilk are political and economic idiots in the truest sense of the word. They don't know or care what the consequence of their actions may lead to. Their entire reason for being is to dismantle the various regulations and institutions that protect markets, and subsequently people, from runaway Capitalism. That's why any retrospective analysis of their legislation and careers leads to a lot of "That was a mistake" and "I didn't know that would happen"; they don't carefully plan or think out the potential consequences of their actions, they just lie and bull**** until their agenda is completed.
Because they are employed by Capital to do these things. There job begins and ends with dismantling whatever they are payed to dismantle. Whether that negatively affects the Party they are affiliated with, whether that promotes or furthers whatever ideology they allegedly ascribe to, whether or not you as their constituent desires it, is of no concern. They are rewarded handsomely for doing it and can look to a cushy career as a lobbyist on successful completion and exit from politics.
They are the political equivalent of the corporate "Yes Man" that lies and bull****s his way to positions he is unqualified to handle at the expense of his colleagues. He has no pride in his work or desire to make things easier for his colleagues. He just cynically climbs the corporate ladder for personal gain. He won't produce anything, his presence and lack of ability is dangerous and destructive, and will often be the one responsible for major problems that arise.
Where your wife goes wrong is thinking that Neoliberalism is a serious ideology that can be influenced or reasoned with and that Neoliberals care in the slightest. It's not an actual ideology or movement so much as a vehicle for self-promotion and career advancement. Your wife does not understand how power actually works, who she is supporting, what left-wing ideology actually is, or really even the basics of politics.
Yes, it is true that Progressive policies are untenable. That is by design. The way the American Government functions is that massive amounts of corporate money are thrown around and are ultimately what makes the whole thing tick. That's because everyone's political career is based on whether they can get a certain amount of the vote which means they must have a platform and the ability to influence people. The way to rig a democracy (not that America really is one) is to manipulate the public in your favor (or rig the system from the start in America's case).
While your wife may view Progressives as petulant the truth is that nobody likes Neoliberalism. That's why everybody constructs these grand narratives of epic struggles of Good and Evil between Literal Fascists and Actual Communists. Nobody can really contend with the idea that their beliefs and struggles are cynically manipulated by smoke-filled rooms thronged with business men that could not care less about ideology or its struggle. The idea that white supremacy is largely carried out by the diverse and minority friendly Democrats that hold no ill will towards non-whites or really care about furthering the white race (it's just business) or that female or minority representation in popular media is a product of cynical marketing strategies funded by old straight white men that sexually harass their secretaries is ultimately too much to bear for ordinary people that need something to believe in.
Neoliberalism is to politics what nihilism is to a rational mind. Maybe it is the truth of the universe but it is fundamentally poison to humanity. Neoliberalism is universally reviled among all ideologies, from die hard Communists to NeoNazis. Nobody likes Neoliberalism, not even its apologists and those who benefit from it, so they have to construct their own rationalizations and fantasies to cope with it dominating contemporary politics.
Biden and Trump are fundamentally the same type of self-promoting ignoramuses that have no understanding or desire to understand politics. The sole difference between them is that Trump is incompetent and widely disliked in politics where Biden is not. Thus Trump would have been the stagnant candidate to Biden's accelerationism, not the other way around as the narrative dictates. But because they are the exact same type of Neoliberal/Neoconservative types that everyone hates; a narrative is then constructed around this being an epic battle for Democracy against Fascism/Globalism as a coping mechanism.
And the corporate media is more than happy to facilitate these fantasies as long as they are handsomely paid with benefits.
And that's why, as Neoliberals admit, they will never support Progressives or their policies. That corporate money and symbiosis with the media is what allows universally reviled Neoliberals to win popularity contests. The sheer amount of spin, gaslighting, and general propaganda that it takes to make the unlikable likeable is a product of Neoliberal deregulation that allowed the media to consolidate combined with massive amounts of money it takes to run such a propaganda machine. Biden is a corporate product and commodity.
Which means that Neoliberal politicians are dependent on corporations to even have a career in politics. If they step out of line and support Progressives and their policies then that money dries up and they will have flushed their careers down the toilet. Which effectively means that Neoliberals, whose entire reason for being is self-promotion and career climbing, will be committing suicide.
Which then begs the question that is ignored or rationalized by Neoliberal apologists of why Progressives or the left in general should support Neoliberalism when it runs counter to the left by design? They won't ever be able to support these policies or groups, no matter how popular or desired they are, because of their corporate benefactors. They also fundamentally reject ideology or being held to their professed beliefs and principles.
Once you parse through all the propaganda there ultimately is no reason for this unity to happen and all the rationalizations for doing so are completely contradictory and incoherent. Why would an alleged anti-racist vote for the architect of modern systemic racism against a complete newcomer to politics that hasn't even come close to the level of white supremacy the Democrats have? The current anti-racist protests aren't being against anything Donald Trump has done, but what Biden created. That's before getting into the what-if scenario had Michael "Stop and Frisk; Actually a Republican" Bloomberg not made the mistake of showing up to the debate.
It's completely incoherent, but that's ultimately indicative of the success of corporate propaganda. And why Neoliberals are completely tied to the system to the point that they will never engage in the anti-system politics of Progressives.
And it's this lack of understanding that leads your wife to say silly things like:
"So, white, male, cisgender, heterosexual Progressives hate the Third Way because they've never had to worry about losing their rights so they don't care that Third Way strategy is how Civil Rights get codified."
I'm waiting for the final vote tally for my full analysis and commentary, but all current showing suggest that the Democrats had a major exodus of working class minorities and an influx of rich white suburbanites that have been voting R since Reagan. Meaning Biden squeaked by on white males that have never had to worry about losing their rights. That's before getting into how Bernie's base was largely comprised of those Hispanics that went for Trump among other minorities.
And that's before getting into how the Civil Rights movement won
because they were so uncompromising. Had they taken the early deals of fair bus seating in exchange for keeping other things segregated then they would have lost, because you can't be considered equal when you're not actually equal.
"The demand put in the platform wouldn't have gotten in there is someone hadn't gone balls out leftist."
Which demand exactly? The extremely popular M4A or Marijuana legalization that never made it in? Or was it the no taking fossil fuel money that's been quietly dropped? Have Democrats finally reconciled their foreign policy (war is one of the largest contributers to climate change) with their climate policy?
The last "balls out" leftist we had (FDR) was voted in so much that they had create term limits. The closest balls out leftist we had currently was universally popular among every base but Neoliberals.
"I will support a Third Way Democrat over a socialist any day."
This is probably the most case in point thing she could give me with respect to neoliberalism. She would rather support a fake ideology over "socialist" even though the Progressive group she identifies with is basically code for socialism on some goofy basis of "pragmatism" which ultimately is Neoliberal propaganda. She should perhaps look into what these "Third Way Democrats" have done with respect to Progressive power in the Democratic Party and the minorities she champions.
Your wife is not an "fbomb Progressive", leftist, or some sort of West Wing wannabe. She's a Neoliberal that wears radical left aesthetics. Like most of whom self-identify as "left" "Marxist" "Communist" "Socialist" or "Anarchist" nowadays.
Your beliefs are defined by your adherence to them. Principles are called that because you aren't supposed to compromise on them. Dropping them the moment they became inconvenient means you don't actually believe in them irrespective of how they relate to your identity and/or self-interest/self-promotion. You don't believe in "Socialism" "Leftism" or whatever else because it's trendy to do so in your circles or because they're easy to further and materialize. They are fundamentally a part of your worldview and instinctual beliefs.
What your wife is advocating is essentially "You must support your enemies that have dedicated themselves to destroying everything you believe in order to further your beliefs". That's an oxymoron on the level of "We had to destroy the village in order to save it" and "We had to start the war in order to prevent" that were common rationalizations against anti-war sentiment. It's self-serving for those who are trying to get you to go against your own interests, but it isn't actually useful for anything else.
The tragedy of modern politics is that people merely wear these things as brands and aesthetics. That's why we're locked in the constant cycle of whataboutism and hypocrisy as one group that is wiling to drop their beliefs accuses the other group that is willing to drop their beliefs of dropping their beliefs. Because neither person wants to deal with the inconvenience of principles when it hinders their personal advancement, so modern politics is one long cycle of hypocrisy, cynicism, and nihilism.
Biden and the rest of the Neoliberal Democrats are not "different shades of left" "Progressives that want the same things but want to get there slower (for some reason)" or "centrists". They aren't even on the political spectrum. They view and use politics as a vehicle for their own careerism and self-promotion, not for furthering ideology or effecting any political movement. Whatever is most convenient for them at the time is what they "believe".
And so too are Progressives not the moralizers and purity testers. There is ultimately no functional difference from consequences born of ignorance and consequences born of malice. Hanlon's Razor is more or less referring to this. There isn't much difference between Mitch's desire to destroy Social Security out of maliciousness towards the poor and Biden's desire to do so out of willful ignorance and deference to those paying him to do so.
The only way to differentiate them is to attempt to apply a morality argument to maliciousness versus willful ignorance. Mitch is the "greater of two evils" because he is doing something knowing full well the harms it brings and Biden is the "lesser of two evils" because he's acting out of ignorance and thus all of his consequences are "mistakes" and all of Mitch's consequences are "evil".
Thus Neoliberalism is dependent on vapid moralizing because it has no actual ties or relations to the left. The entire Democrat strategy is built on the lesser of two evils or what is actually the "narcissism of small differences" precisely because they are unwilling to enact left-wing policies or further left-wing ideals. Progressives and Neoliberals are fundamentally different in ideology. Neoliberals and Neoconservatives are the exact same thing with minor aesthetic differences.
And that goes for Biden and Trump as well. They both are the exact same willfully ignorant (of politics) candidates that are using politics to further their own self-promotion and careerism. The only difference is that Trump is incompetent at building rapport within the system while Biden is very experienced at it. Thus Trump was actually the stagnation candidate that people were making Biden out to be while Biden is the acceleration candidate people were making Trump out to be.
Failure on the left's part to see through Trump paying lip service to partisan politics he clearly doesn't believe in is a sign that they see politics as brands and aesthetics. The actual smart thing for Progressives to do would be to work in hand with right-wing populists to overthrow the current system that they both are working towards doing. But because they both can only see politics as brands and aesthetics, they refuse to work with each other and instead attempt to bargain with Neocons and Neolibs. Of whom happily work in hand with each other to destroy populism on both sides.
Because the proletariat in America has no semblance of class consciousness while the bourgeoisie do. And that's why the establishment wins.