Former US president Richard Nixon, who resigned in the aftermath of the Watergate scandal, was born to a poor family and made it to his country’s top office, having trained as a lawyer, largely by dint of his own hard work.
In his address accepting his first presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in Chicago on July 28, 1960, having already served for eight years as vice president, he said: “I believe in the American dream because I’ve seen it come true in my own life.”
There is no specific definition of what the “American dream” actually is, but over the years it has come to be understood as the aspirations of the ordinary person, wherever they are from, to get ahead in the US armed only with freedom, opportunities and their achievements. Anybody in the US, so the idea goes, has the opportunity to develop as they please, to establish their own family from modest beginnings, and to move from rags to riches within three generations.
Meanwhile, new Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has recently burst onto the scene, with Beijing’s propaganda machine taking out adverts in the Washington Post proclaiming Xi’s concept of the “Chinese dream.” This new construct, purporting to place the people and the country at its very core, is the work of dictators sitting in China’s capital, forcing their own conception of a dream onto the public.
The Chinese dream of the princelings political elite is but a rehash of the motto of modernizers in the late Qing Dynasty — “make the country wealthy and the military powerful” (富國強兵) — albeit without explicitly using the word “military.” Xi’s “resurgence of the Chinese people” (中華民族的復興) retains traces of Republic of China (ROC) founder Sun Yat-sen’s (孫中山) motto “expel the foreigners [referring to the Manchu Qing rulers] and resurrect the Chinese nation” (驅逐韃虜,恢復中華): It is just that now the Manchu are no longer the foreigners in question, and Han Chinese ethnic chauvinism is now aimed at suppressing Tibetans and Uighurs instead.
The Chinese dream is also about “benefiting the people, although the people themselves were clearly an afterthought, an appendage to, not of, the main corpus. Nowhere in Xi’s dream suite will you find anything approaching freedom or democracy. The realization of Xi’s dream lies down the road of “socialism with Chinese characteristics.” Indeed, it is reminiscent of the controlled reform advocated by the late Qing politician Zhang Zhidong (張之洞), with his concept of “Chinese learning for fundamental principles and Western learning for practical application.”
The rich and powerful revel in plenty, while saying that they will create a dream for the masses. Meanwhile, in the real world, the Chinese elite, the business magnates and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) officials who have sent their families abroad are competing with each other in search of their own American dream. The 1.3 billion people living in China are having their life spans shortened because of the polluted air they breathe; Tibetans are resorting to self-immolations to draw attention to the plight they suffer because of Beijing’s policies; the Huangpu River is clogged with tens of thousands of pig corpses; and Chinese are obliged to cross the border into Hong Kong to buy baby milk powder they can trust not to poison their children.
One Chinese netizen has said that their own dream is quite simple, and different from that being offered. They just want blue skies, clean water, food that is safe to eat, milk that is safe to drink and for their children to grow up in a fair and just society.
James Wang is a political commentator.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations