Political Freedom or Economic Freedom or ... Door #3?

"The philosophers of the 18th century argued that the church had to move out of the political sphere, and the state out of the social and economic spheres.  Hong Kong enjoys one of the freest societies in the world: total social freedom, total economic freedom, and yet very little political freedom. Still, this compares very well with France, where the church of Marxism has invaded the State and the educational system, destroying both, while the obese State has invaded the social and economic sphere, leaving entrepreneurs without oxygen.  As Tocqueville expected, we have moved towards a strange and benign 'molle dictature'." - Charles GaveThe most important unanswered question facing the next generation is how economic and social freedoms can exist on a continuum of decreasing political freedoms.  Which continuum is more malignant?  Are they both doomed to fail?  Is the only sustainable path a trajectory (as envisioned in the exceptionalism of America's own founding) that puts increasing political and economic freedoms on an equal path, or is the Chinese model of granting less political freedom while simultaneously granting more economic freedom palatable?  Or, most worrisome of all, can the Obama-esque model (already patterned in France) of granting less and less economic freedom keep political freedom immune along the way? I believe history is going to tell us that there is no chicken or egg dilemma here.  Political freedom and economic freedom - both - now - sine qua non.  China has it wrong.  France has it wrong.  Jefferson and Madison had it right.