"Social Credit": Moral Guidance or Authoritarian Nightmare?
The idea is to foster a more trustworthy and morally-conscious society. At worst, it is a Draconian measure of totalitarian control, the subjugation of the hearts and minds of the masses.
Over the past decade, the Chinese Communist Party (CPP) has been constructing a moral caste mechanism to monitor the behavior of its enormous population — and rank them based on their "social credit."
In concept, this ranking reflects all aspects of life, judging citizens' individual and corporate trustworthiness. The end product results in a Social Credit Score, which when fully implemented will be the basis of a reward/punishment system for Chinese citizens, businesses and governance.
Think of it this way: Our financial Credit Rating, but massively expanded using comprehensive and invasive surveillance of habits and activities.
Ideally, at least to the Chinese, “social credit” rewards good behavior while discouraging bad or pernicious conduct. At worst, it is viewed as a Draconian measure of totalitarian control, subjugation of the hearts and minds of the masses ... a personification of Orwell’s 1984 dystopia.
Is “social credit” a redeemable concept? Can it foster a better, more productive society in Communist China, where there exists a socialist market economy – one in which the state-owned (CCP) enterprises sector exists in parallel with market capitalism and private ownership? Is it possible elsewhere?
Like in a Democracy? Like … in the United States?
Where did “Social Credit” come from?
According to Wired magazine, China’s Social Credit system was formally put forward in 2011 and announced by then premier Wen Jiabao. Three years later, the Chinese State Counsel presented an outline detailing the collection of data on individuals, businesses and judicial administration.
In concrete terms, the system consists of a complex set of databases and initiatives that monitors and analyzes the trustworthiness of its populace. An algorithm compiles and determines the “social credit” score.
Most data are gleaned from traditional sources … available financial and governmental records and existing information. Collection has since expanded, incorporating records from tech giants such as Huawei, China’s largest information and communications company (our AT&T) and real-time data transfers (i.e. bank transactions). Even surveillance methods and facial recognition technology will be incorporated.
All of the data are centralized. Those databases are managed by China’s economic planner, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) and the country’s court system.
These institutions are under the supervision of the CCP, which sets guidelines and policy.
“Good” vs. “Bad” Behavior
According to a report on the corporate social credit system published by the European Chamber of Commerce in China in 2019, the reward mechanism is not as developed as the sanctioning element.
Right now, “punishment” exceeds “rewards.” For example, people can be punished for driving badly, accessing corrosive web sites, or making too many “bad” purchases (cigarettes, video games, etc.) Untrustworthy individuals could face restrictions affecting loans, access to health care and education. Minor crimes lower scores. Restoring “good” credit is next-to-impossible.
A good rating could offer priority health care or deposit-free renting of public housing, preferred educational opportunity, and open access to travel. If/when fully operational, that ranking would manifest and be accessed via phone, displayed as a QR Code.
For businesses, in addition to its own operations, companies are asked to submit information on their partners and suppliers to authorities. Poor practices, low trustworthiness (not paying bills on time) and ratings from suppliers and customers influence a company’s own credit score. “Blacklisted” could face higher inspection rates and targeted audits, subsidies, tax rebates and other restrictions.
Ultimately, Chinese officials do not hide the purpose … comply, or else.
“Those who lose credibility will find it hard to make a tiny step in society.” (Premier Li Keqiang, 2018)
A Work In Progress
As you might expect, building the Social Credit system is a monumental undertaking. Imagine monitoring a populace of 1.4 billion people, the vast majority of whom live under extreme financial conditions.* (see below)
Even more daunting is the unwieldy process of integrating many disparate data systems under one roof.
Currently, it is not unified. Pilot programs have been implemented by local governments across Chinese provinces. However, data on the vast majority of the populace are sketchy and incomplete. Original rollout was expected by 2020, but that deadline was not realized.
However, China plans on making it mandatory for everyone, with social credit scores measured in real-time, per Wired magazine.
According to data from the People’s Bank of China (PBOC), the nation’s central bank, the social credit system already covered 1.02 billion individuals and 28.34 million companies and organizations by the end of 2019. Many of these had already been rated, and some had even been blacklisted.
The NDRC said in July 2019 that 2.56 million people had been restricted from taking flights, 90,000 people had been prevented from using high-speed rail services and 300,000 people had been deemed untrustworthy by Chinese courts.
*The Per capita income of the United States is 5.78 and 3.61 times higher than that of China in nominal and PPP terms, respectively. The US is the 5th richest country in the world, whereas China comes at 63rd rank. On a PPP basis, The United States is in 8th position, and China is at 76th.
Can it happen here?
Anyone over age 25 knows all about credit reporting services. Good credit validates the ability to secure a loan, or apply for a credit card. Bad credit equals to an unpalatable interest rate, or worse, denial. Other rating systems apply in the U.S, but usually in the form of entitlements or rewards (i.e. travel miles, preferred customers.)
But social credit? Regulating fundamental freedoms and rights through systemic coercion and a highly punitive Code of Conduct? Imagine jeopardizing your future education over a parking ticket? Or being denied a loan for playing too much Minecraft? Lady Liberty would sooner drop her torch into New York harbor.
Imagine jeopardizing your future education over a parking ticket? Or being denied a loan for playing too much Minecraft? Lady Liberty would sooner drop her torch into New York harbor.
“We the people” is encoded in the American DNA. “Freedom” is much more than a word for nothing left to lose. Since its birth, America has fought in 12 major wars to defend it.
That said, contravention on “unalienable rights” is not without precedent. In fact, the Constitution has been bent, torn and twisted many times before … and especially during wartime.
“We the people” is encoded in the American DNA. “Freedom” is much more than a word for nothing less to lose.
During World War II President Franklin Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, calling for the interment of 175,000 Japanese Americans. Then there was the radioactive Patriot Act following the 9/11 attacks and subsequent invasion of Afghanistan, putting to test the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. Even Abraham Lincoln, perhaps our most revered national treasure, was accused of trampling on the sacred document, censuring newspapers 106 times (First Amendment) and suspending the writ of habeus corpus in 1861.
Yet cases of national emergency do allow for extreme measures.
Mandates and Masks: A Constitutional Crisis?
Today, the Constitution is challenged under the guise of another war, this one between political ideologies over pandemic lock-downs and vaccine mandates. Some argue that public and media hysteria are superficially driving hyperbolic opinions towards governmental actions.
Showing ID to buy liquor is required by law. But an “executive order” requiring a vaccination card or wearing a mask just to have dinner out is quite another thing .. perhaps a de facto version of “social credit.”
At the moment, many Americans have shown little stomach toward compliance. Public opinion, court challenges, ever-evolving science (“misinformation”) and media outrage have fostered institutional distrust and are driving the backlash.
Still, a large portion of the population believes the utilitarian notion of the “greater good” of public health takes precedence over individual freedoms.
There is no consensus, and, seemingly, no middle ground. The national “debate” has devolved into ideological poop-slinging.
G’day, Mate: Are you vaxxed?
Australia may be our most comparable example of governmental authority vs. public character. The Commonwealth of Australia is a parliamentary monarchy, but its system parallels our constitutional republic in many ways … a two-party national parliament, individual states governance, etc.
Aussies have always embraced robust values of freedom and individual sovereignty. The national image is not dissimilar to ours, the buoyant, fiercely independent “cowboy” free to pursue adventure and self-reliance.
But with COVID, perhaps no other country has more Draconian and authoritarian enforcement of vaccination restrictions than Australia. It is not illusory. Aussies have been subject to isolation, travel restrictions and invasive government surveillance.
There exists in the State of Victoria the Home Quarantine App, which tracks citizens movement through their mobile phones. QR codes are required everywhere. There is evidence of relegation to Detainment Camps with no right to trial. In Victoria and other provinces, you can be arrested for walking your dog.
Even more troubling, according to MP Alex Antic, is compliance. He openly worries about Aussies’ casual acceptance and conditioning to soft authoritarian power. It seems many Aussies are more than willing to bend the knee. See Mr. Antic’s views in a recent discussion with American scientist/podcaster Bret Weinstein.
In China, freedom carries a hollow definition. Its aging population has no concept of inalienable rights. It simply doesn’t exist in the collective psyche. Compliance is imbued and non-negotiable.
However, if the autonomous, freedom-embracing latitude of Aussies is so easily compromised, it would follow that a “social credit” system is neither unthinkable nor untenable.
Ultimately, is that a section of the library that Americans want to go?
###
Sources: Much of the information above includes articles from Business Insider, South China Morning Post and Wired magazine.
Great & timely topic. At the end of the day "social credit" is one piece of the emerging transhumanist pie that is incrementally being thrust upon not just Americans but every citizen all over the world. This pandemic offered a decent preview of what it may look like when a technocratic elite decides who's "in or out." If you're willing to put things in your body, be tracked, and go along with someone else's idea of the "greater good" then you don't have to worry right? If you comply and keep your comments to the pre-approved narrative, you can have "freedom." The problem is you're not actually free if your ability to go places, do things, and think for yourself is mitigated by those who have decided what you're allowed to do with your mind and body.
Technocracy, transhumanism, and social credit will bring a new kind of slavery that will be touted as safety and freedom. Long ago in America when some blacks were slaves, they had to have permission to leave the plantation and they had to show their papers to any white person who asked. The question to ask from this paradigm is: will you fight the bright shiney distracting enslavement or acquiesce to it? After this pandemic, I now know many will find their happiness in slavery, even if they must sacrifice family, friends, and freedom to do it. They may have to lie to themselves so they will have to lie to you too. We all just saw the most prolific and omnipresent propaganda campaign in human history. The next campaign for social credit may be even worse.
Keep up the good reporting Jim!
Great piece, Jim. There is one other macro American concept that will animate our opposition to this idea ever being deployed here: the decentralization of power is in our DNA. This concept underlies every decision that was made in setting the federal government up to begin with.