5. Antithetical

The “Antithetical Chinese Dream” takes a different perspective, focusing on the tensions or contradictions among the various kinds of Chinese Dreams. These are the normal tradeoffs that all societies must consider continuously, the classic expression being “Guns vs. Butter”(Note: I’m sorry, but this really isn’t a classic American expression. Never heard of it. Did some quick online research - It was coined about 100 years ago by a failed candidate for US president, and referred to once by former US president Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s. Nazi Germany’s Joseph Goebbels used it more. So I think we should take “American” out)—how to allocate national resources between military strength and social improvements. In China’s case, however, the primary tradeoff is not between military and civilian funding, but between economic development, which is required to build the country and alleviate severe social imbalances, and the problematic byproducts of rapid development, particularly pollution and the creation of social imbalances.

Following are several natural tensions implicit in The Chinese Dream. 1. Economic development vs. environmental damage.

2. Economic development vs. social imbalances: investment tradeoffs between urban and rural, coastal and inland (i.e., it is usually more efficient to invest in developed areas, but that would make social imbalances worse).

3. National vs. personal: investment tradeoffs between national projects such as basic science research, space program, defense needs, and the like, and the immediate needs of the people, such as healthcare.

4. National vs. global: balancing China’s vital sovereignty over disputed borders or maritime territories with the concerns of neighbors; protecting the national without disturbing the global.

5. Long-term vs. short-term: investment tradeoffs between long-term projects such as the South-to-North Water Diversion Project and the many short-term needs such as subsidies for poor or rural citizens.

These are not unusual tensions in themselves—in fact they are quite normal—but to be always aware of them and to address them directly will enable The Chinese Dream to move from a general vision, exemplary as it is, to a guiding principle that can drive practical implementation. The point here, remember, is not to address the specifics merits of the arguments, but rather to present diverse ways of thinking about The Chinese Dream.